Proof of Jesus?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
01-11-2012, 04:15 PM
RE: Proof of Jesus?
(01-11-2012 04:12 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(01-11-2012 04:10 PM)Free Wrote:  Okay, so why is what Tacitus wrote not "good evidence" to support the existence of the dude "Jesus" who the Christians fawn over?

Tacitus was not even alive during the alleged events of the gospels.

Why is that important? Also, we don't care about the gospels.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2012, 04:17 PM
RE: Proof of Jesus?
(01-11-2012 04:15 PM)Free Wrote:  
(01-11-2012 04:12 PM)Chas Wrote:  Tacitus was not even alive during the alleged events of the gospels.

Why is that important?

Weeping

Where did his knowledge come from? What or who were his sources? What were their sources?

He's just repeating stories. It's called 'hearsay'.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2012, 04:18 PM
RE: Proof of Jesus?
(01-11-2012 04:17 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(01-11-2012 04:15 PM)Free Wrote:  Why is that important?

Weeping

Where did his knowledge come from? What or who were his sources? What were their sources?

He's just repeating stories. It's called 'hearsay'.

Can you prove this? Or, are you merely asserting it?

You are now using an argument from silence.

You have provided no evidence.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2012, 04:20 PM
RE: Proof of Jesus?
(01-11-2012 04:18 PM)Free Wrote:  
(01-11-2012 04:17 PM)Chas Wrote:  Weeping

Where did his knowledge come from? What or who were his sources? What were their sources?

He's just repeating stories. It's called 'hearsay'.

Can you prove this? Or, are you merely asserting it?

Nowhere in his writings does he provide credible sources or references.
You are the one crediting Tacitus with credibility; you have the burden of proof.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2012, 04:22 PM
RE: Proof of Jesus?
(01-11-2012 04:20 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(01-11-2012 04:18 PM)Free Wrote:  Can you prove this? Or, are you merely asserting it?

Nowhere in his writings does he provide credible sources or references.
You are the one crediting Tacitus with credibility; you have the burden of proof.

Again, you are asserting with no evidence.

You say he does not provide any credible sources or references in his writings? Not true, he does it numerous times, and he shows that in the first paragraph.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2012, 04:27 PM
RE: Proof of Jesus?
(01-11-2012 04:22 PM)Free Wrote:  
(01-11-2012 04:20 PM)Chas Wrote:  Nowhere in his writings does he provide credible sources or references.
You are the one crediting Tacitus with credibility; you have the burden of proof.

Again, you are asserting with no evidence.

You say he does not provide any credible sources or references in his writings? Not true, he does it numerous times, and he shows that in the first paragraph.

Please provide a reference.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2012, 04:33 PM
RE: Proof of Jesus?
(01-11-2012 04:27 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(01-11-2012 04:22 PM)Free Wrote:  Again, you are asserting with no evidence.

You say he does not provide any credible sources or references in his writings? Not true, he does it numerous times, and he shows that in the first paragraph.

Please provide a reference.

Sure.

Here's a short list of quotes from Annals where he speaks about using the Roman records and Registries, and other historians for his research:

Quote:1. The histories of Tiberius, Caius, Claudius, and Nero, while they were in power, were falsified through terror, and after their death were written under the irritation of a recent hatred. Hence my purpose is to relate a few facts about Augustus- more particularly his last acts, then the reign of Tiberius, and all which follows, without either bitterness or partiality, from any motives to which I am far removed.

2. These records, the most ancient of all human history, are still seen engraved on stone.

3. The boundaries now fixed by Claudius may be easily recognized, as they are specified in the public records.

4. I do not find in any historian or in the daily register that Antonia, Germanicus's mother ...

5. But we have learnt that it suits the dignity of the Roman people to reserve history for great achievements, and to leave such details to the city's daily register.

6. I find in the registers of the Senate that Cerialis Anicius, consul-elect, proposed a motion ...

And what does he say about using hearsay?

Quote:My object in mentioning and refuting this story is, by a conspicuous example, to put down hearsay, and to request all into whose hands my work shall come, not to catch eagerly at wild and improbable rumours in preference to genuine history which has not been perverted into romance.

So there you go.

Can we move along now?

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2012, 04:35 PM
RE: Proof of Jesus?
(01-11-2012 04:33 PM)Free Wrote:  
(01-11-2012 04:27 PM)Chas Wrote:  Please provide a reference.

Sure.

Here's a short list of quotes from Annals where he speaks about using the Roman records and Registries for his research:

Quote:1. The histories of Tiberius, Caius, Claudius, and Nero, while they were in power, were falsified through terror, and after their death were written under the irritation of a recent hatred. Hence my purpose is to relate a few facts about Augustus- more particularly his last acts, then the reign of Tiberius, and all which follows, without either bitterness or partiality, from any motives to which I am far removed.

2. These records, the most ancient of all human history, are still seen engraved on stone.

3. The boundaries now fixed by Claudius may be easily recognized, as they are specified in the public records.

4. I do not find in any historian or in the daily register that Antonia, Germanicus's mother ...

5. But we have learnt that it suits the dignity of the Roman people to reserve history for great achievements, and to leave such details to the city's daily register.

6. I find in the registers of the Senate that Cerialis Anicius, consul-elect, proposed a motion ...

And what does he say about using hearsay?

Quote:My object in mentioning and refuting this story is, by a conspicuous example, to put down hearsay, and to request all into whose hands my work shall come, not to catch eagerly at wild and improbable rumours in preference to genuine history which has not been perverted into romance.

So there you go.

Can we move along now?

No, those are not references to his information about Christ.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2012, 04:39 PM (This post was last modified: 01-11-2012 05:04 PM by Free.)
RE: Proof of Jesus?
(01-11-2012 04:35 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(01-11-2012 04:33 PM)Free Wrote:  Sure.

Here's a short list of quotes from Annals where he speaks about using the Roman records and Registries for his research:


And what does he say about using hearsay?


So there you go.

Can we move along now?

No, those are not references to his information about Christ.

So moving the goal posts now? You didn't specify anything about Christ. You specifically targeted his credibility by stating his "writings" didn't use any referrence materials.

Regardless, any concerns that Tacitus did not use Roman records, other historians, or other available records is now put to rest. This is evidence that he did use records to research for his history book. If you are going to pinpoint the area about Christ, then we can do that to any ancient historian and doubt anything they wrote.

Aside from that, Tacitus tells us the following at the beginning of his history about the fires of Rome- which includes the part about Christ:

Quote:A disaster followed, whether accidental or treacherously contrived by the emperor, is uncertain, as authors have given both accounts, worse, however, and more dreadful than any which have ever happened to this city by the violence of fire.

So there you can see that Tacitus used the works of other historians when he wrote his history of the fires of Rome, which includes the part about Christ.

So what are we to think from that? He didn't use referrence materials and only used hearsay?

Not a reasonable position considering the evidence.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-11-2012, 05:06 PM
RE: Proof of Jesus?
(01-11-2012 04:39 PM)Free Wrote:  
(01-11-2012 04:35 PM)Chas Wrote:  No, those are not references to his information about Christ.

So moving the goal posts now? You didn't specify anything about Christ. You specifically targeted his credibility by stating his "writings" didn't use any referrence materials.

Regardless, any concerns that Tacitus did not use Roman records, other historians, or other available records is now put to rest. This is evidence that he did use records to research for his history book. If you are going to pinpoint the area about Christ, then we can do that to any ancient historian and doubt anything they wrote.

Aside from that, Tacitus tells us the following at the beginning of his history about the fires of Rome- which includes the part about Christ:

Quote:A disaster followed, whether accidental or treacherously contrived by the emperor, is uncertain, as authors have given both accounts, worse, however, and more dreadful than any which have ever happened to this city by the violence of fire.

So there you can see that Tacitus used the works of other historians when he wrote his history of the fires of Rome, which includes the part about Christ.

So what are we to think from that? He didn't use referrence materials and only used hearsay?

Not a reasonable position considering the evidence.

Note the thread title, "Proof of Jesus". Of course requiring his sources for knowledge of Christ is reasonable. Those are the only goal posts that matter.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: