Juststeve

aa5874:

Tacitus records that Nero blamed the Christian for the fire of Rome which took place in 64 C.E. Tacitus himself reports that Christians confessed to setting the fire. Thus Tacitus is witness to the fact that Christianity had reached Rome by 64.

In 112 C.E. Pliny the Younger wrote a letter to Trajan inquiring about how he should handle the Christians living in what is now Turkey. While this is just past the end of the first centtury the letter in context indicates that Christianity had spread in the Empire and was considered a problem serious enough to demand the attention of Trajan himself.

Josephus also makes a disputed reference to Jesus and a clear reference to Christians during the first century C.E.

There are more but I don’t have the time to dig them up.

Steve

bacht

These passages are usually considered 1st C in the traditional dating scheme:

In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; but in these last days he has spoken to us by a Son, whom he appointed the heir of all things, through whom also he created the world.
He reflects the glory of God and bears the very stamp of his nature, upholding the universe by his word of power.
When he had made purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty on high, having become as much superior to angels as the name he has obtained is more excellent than theirs.

Hebrews 1.1-4

[God] has delivered us from the dominion of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.
He is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation; for in him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or authorities -- all things were created through him and for him.
He is before all things, and in him all things hold together.
He is the head of the body, the church; he is the beginning, the first-born from the dead, that in everything he might be pre-eminent.
For in him all the fulness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things, whether on earth or in heaven, making peace by the blood of his cross.

Colossians 1.16-20

Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied himself, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.
And being found in human form he humbled himself and became obedient unto death, even death on a cross.
Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

Phillipians 2.5-11

There's nothing here about a Galilean carpenter, rather someone close to divine already. Once you get to the gospel of John (late 2nd C) the transformation is complete. Of course Christianity was heterodox until Constantine as you say.

No Robots

The synoptic tradition was transmitted and written down in the context of a Church which did not believe Jesus to be a mere earthly teacher. It believed him to be the Messiah: Christ, the Son of Man, the Servant of the Lord, the Son of God, the Lord — to mention only a few of the messianic epithets. This high Christology cannot be disconnected from the impression made by Jesus on his disciples, and furthermore it must have some original connection with Jesus' own view of his work, of his position, and of himself. The opinion expressed by so many scholars, that the Christology of the NT is essentially a creation of the young Church, is an intelligent thesis, but historically most improbable.--Memory and Manuscript / Birger Gerhardsson, p. 325

Emphasis added.

Yellum Notnef

Jesus was a genius? This is sounding more like a highschool crush than a religion.

No Robots

Would you say the same if someone were to say that he loved the music of Mozart? Mozart's genius is expressed as music. The genius of Christ is expressed as himself:

Jesus taught personally. He pointed to himself not merely as an illustration of his teaching, but as an incarnation of it. When Moses addressed the Israelites, and wished to bring the thought of God home to them, he said: " The God of your fathers has sent me unto you!" Jesus, on the other hand, always spoke of his own God, his own Father. It was not a different idea; it was a change of emphasis, and the change was toward the accentuation of the personal element, Jesus' own personal interfusion with his teaching. The natural consequence was his personal appeal to his hearers, and the personal response of not a few.--Enelow, p. 101

Toto

No, there are no more, and some of these are dodgy. The Tacitus reference is suspect, and Tacitus does not report that the Christians admitted to setting the fire. You have Josephus backwards. He makes a disputed reference to Jesus and to the tribe of Christians, and a brief reference to Jesus called Christ, which is generally accepted as referring to Jesus except on these boards.

show_no_mercy

What makes it even worse is that there's very little evidence that Jesus said anything remotely like what the gospel writers had him say. Maybe No Robots is really in love with Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John.

There is very little "genius" in the character depicted by those gospel writers that couldn't have been found by any other two-bit homeless preacher or philosopher in 1st century Palestine. The Buddha was light years ahead of Jesus.

Yellum Notnef

But there's no doubt of the existence of Mozart. Mozart was a genius who contributed much more to the world than some mystical babble.
My point about the "crush" is that you and your favorite authors have no other evidence for jesus except "Jesus was awesome" which isn't evidence of anything except that someone is smitten.

Face it. If jesus wasn't the shepherd of heaven who kept your dead relatives company in the afterlife hardly anyone would be interested. And certainly nobody would think Jesus should have won a Nobel prize.

aa5874

Tacitus did NOT write one single thing about Jesus or Jesus believers. There were Christians in the days of Claudius who did not believe in Jesus. They were magicians one was called Simon Magus.

First Apology 26

Please read the Pliny letter to Trajan, he did NOT write a single word about Jesus or Jesus believers. Christians did not have to believe in Jesus of the NT, a person could be called a Christian if they believe in Simon the magician or the Logos, the philosophical son of God.

A disputed reference does not help, but in any event, Antiquities of the Jews 18.3.3 and 20.9.1 are all forgeries. It is not even possible for a real human to resurrect after being dead for three days as is found in Antiquities of the Jews 18.3.3.

Please dig them up so that I can bury them back. You must have time.

No Robots

Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after justice: for they shall have their fill.--Mt. 5:6

Whenever they's a fight so hungry people can eat, I'll be there. Whenever they's a cop beatin' up a guy, I'll be there . . . . I'll be in the way guys yell when they're mad an'-I'll be in the way kids laugh when they're hungry an' they know supper's ready. An' when our folks eat the stuff they raise an' live in the houses they build-why, I'll be there.--The Grapes of Wrath

The viciousness of the official animus toward the indigent can be breathtaking.--"Is It Now a Crime to Be Poor?" / Barbara Ehrenreich