IamJoseph

I don't think so. If those who did wrongs are not slapped on the butt then how can the truth ever free them? And how is christianity and Islam not hit in the butt when their beliefs and charges are in total contradiction of each other - both cannot be right - both can be wrong - both are beating each other's butts while scapegoating their wrongs on the Jews. They should look at each instead is the way to go.

aa5874

It is not really true at all that we have very few writings from the supposed time of Jesus. There is Philo and Josephus.

Philo was a Jew and a contemporary of the supposed Jesus who wrote about 45 books up to or around the middle of the 1st century.

And Josephus, a Jew and a Pharisee, wrote about 30 books up to the end of the first century.

There is no indication from Philo and Josephus that there was a Messiah called Jesus at around the time of Pilate that was worshipped as a God by thousands of Jews before the Fall of the Jewish Temple.

Both Philo and Josephus mentioned Pilate and did not ever claim that Jews were worshipping a man called Jesus as a God after his burial site was desecrated and his body stolen or vanished. In fact, Philo and Josephus claimed Jews would not worship or allow the effifigies of the Emperor to be placed in the Temple during the time of Pilate.

And based on Josephus, if Jesus really had thousands of followers and was regarded as a false prophet, then it is likely the Romans would have sent their army to kill Jesus and his followers just like the Romans did to the false Egyptian prophet and Theudas and their followers.

So from Philo and Josephus there are about 75 books from Genesis to around 93 CE and there is no mention at all of a Jesus the Messiah, the son of God, that lived during the time of Pilate and further there is no mention of any NEW doctrine by anyone called Jesus, no mention of any Jews that followed Jesus, no miracles of Jesus, and no churches for Jesus.

It must be noted that Josephus was in Rome after he was captured and did not ever mention any religion where a Jewish Messiah called Jesus, the Son of God, was worshipped in Rome.

There are lots of books written in the 1st century by Jews and nothing but forgeries about Jesus.

Chaucer

To say that nothing in Josephus relating to a Jesus the Messiah is really from his pen is one thing. That is at least an opinion shared by a very tiny minority. To say point blank that there is no Josephan mention of a Jesus the Messiah at all, as if that's a fact, is ONE BIG LIE!

Chaucer

JGL53

Still, one would think there would be more extraneous secular fanfare about a guy who could walk on water, heal lepers by his touch, raise a person from the dead after the corpse had begun to stink, and so forth.

It's almost like negative evidence demonstrating that all that was made up crap. Isn't it?

Chaucer

Nothing is demonstrated. A typical overstatement by a typical kneejerk mythicist. One can say that such "evidence" MIGHT POINT to a certain conclusion. But it doesn't demonstrate a single thing. Demonstrate is different. Demonstrate implies conclusive. Learn the language. And it certainly doesn't lead to any FACT, which is what AA was deliberately propagating <edit>

Chaucer

JGL53

I don't know whether it is kneejerk or not, but my view is that absence of evidence is evidence of absence regarding extraordinary or supramundane claims after two fucking thousand years.

Or, as one atheist friend of mine tends to exclaim, "How long will this bullshit go on?"

I think we passed the "put up or shut up" stage quite a while ago.

Chaucer

Here, I'm not addressing the soundness of evidence for a 2000-yr.-old proposition. I'm referring to the Orwellian falsification of what is plainly extant in ancient texts. <edit> You can scream all you like that this passage or that passage seems suspicious to you. But once you get into the business of saying flat-out that such a text doesn't exist (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!), that's Orwellian, that gives me the creeps, and that needs to be challenged each and every time. <edit>

Chaucer

JGL53

I think he meant that there was no actual mentions of Jesus in any writings of Josephus, just interpolations.

And interpolations are LIES.

And since you hate lies so much, why are you supporting obvious LIES?

Huh?

aa5874

How in the world can you ignore evidence or information about Jesus Christ as found in the NT and then claim you don't know anything about Jesus Christ?

In order to properly analyse any character every single bit of information MUST be taken into account.

It must be taken into account, based on Origen, supposedly writing in the third century, that Jesus Christ believers differed greatly in small and great matters about Christ.


This is the preface of De Principiis Based on the preface of De Principiis, up to the third century, the manner of the existence of Jesus Christ was not yet establised.

You cannot ignore information about Jesus Christ and then claim you don't know anything.

There is lots of information about Jesus Christ. See Matthew 1.18, Luke 1.35, Mark 16.6 John 1 and Acts 1.9.

Jesus Christ is described according to the author of De Principiis All the information is there, Jesus Christ of the NT was a God that was before the world began, a mythical entity.

The Church presented a myth to the world and called it Jesus Christ.

Chaucer

Then he should say so. If he says instead that there are no mentions at all and just leaves it at that, THAT'S LYING.

Chaucer