|
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: AUSTRALIA
Posts: 2,265
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roger Pearse
The first question, obviously, is whether the poster is familiar with ancient history in general, and what kinds of evidence are available for ancient figures. I suspect not, since the man in the street generally isn't.
|
More than average and of many enthusiasts of christianity and ancient history [Hebrew, Greek, Roman, European, etc].
Quote:
|
As far as I know there are no ancient historians who would contemplate the non-existence of these people for a moment, regardless of their religious beliefs. This should give anyone advancing it pause for thought, I would have thought.
|
That is not even a reasonable statement. Outside of theological belief, christianity would be the world's least evidential writings. The Gospels is self-declared as being belief - not history. There is no doubt Mohammed or Buddha existed. With the hebrew bible, King David, long depicted as a mythical figure by so-called scholars - has now been scientifically proven as a historical figure in three finds [e.g. the Tel Dan]; Solomon has also been evidenced - both being almost 3000 years old, and a mere 250 years post-Moses. Not bad? The prophetic writers in the next 1000 years [Isaiah, Jeremaia, Micah, Ezekiel, Daniel, Esther, etc] have also been proven as historical figures.
While Moses has not been proven [which alligns with the text - his burial place will not be locatable], there is ample evidence of Moses. The most authentic is the tel Dan find, which shows the psalms as written by David [even describing the vista he wrote about in his terrace overlooking the valleys]. The psalms make numerous mention of Moses, and alligns fully with the Mosaic narratives. The psalms of david are '2900 years old' - consider its implications in relation to the Mosaic five books?
Quote:
I don't know about "scripture." But these are first century texts.
|
Not according to any historian any place.
Quote:
|
On what grounds -- other than religious prejudice -- do we disregard them?
|
Absolutely not on prejudice. It should not be seen as a competition which religion is best and thus which group of humanity is the winner, and which should be negated or discarded. Equally, belief with no proof is hardly a merit, relying only on the premise of mercy and forebeaernce. We are all onusareable to attain as much truth as possible - whichever way the dice may fall and no matter how formidable: all religions are potentially subject to this factor - none are immune. This would apply specially to christianity which doctrines, 'the truth will set you free' - nothing therein about 'belief'?
Quote:
|
No-one questions the authenticity of the Tacitus reference.
|
I can furnish you with 100s of pages where historians ridicule a host of greek and roman writings about their reporting of Jews. Consider this:
Quote:
Vespasian also gave financial rewards to ancient writers.[16] The ancient historians that lived through the period such as Tacitus, Suetonius, Josephus and Pliny the Elder speak suspiciously well of Vespasian while condemning the emperors that came before him.[17] Tacitus admits that his status was elevated by Vespasian, Josephus identifies Vespasian as a patron and savior, and Pliny dedicated his Natural Histories to Vespasian, Titus.[18]
Those that spoke against Vespasian were punished. A number of stoic philosophers were accused of corrupting students with inappropriate teachings and were expelled from Rome.[19] Helvidius Priscus, a pro-republic philosopher, was executed for his teachings.[20]
|
Quote:
|
It is crucially important to remember that any first or second century text which mentions a first century event (or indeed in some cases third or fourth century text) is data. We may decide, on reviewing all the data, that the balance of probablility is that this data is one-sided or mistaken. But data is data.
|
No contest. A truthful and a false report both come under data equally, by your criteria.
Quote:
|
Most people know that there are two passages in Josephus. The short passage is disputed by no-one, and even a century ago only Emil Schurer raised the question.
|
The reverse is the case. An example:
Quote:
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Christianity portal
This article is part of the Jesus and history series of articles.
There are two extant references in Josephus on Jesus, the one directly concerning Jesus has come to be known as the Testimonium Flavianum. These passages appear in The Antiquities of the Jews, written in the year 93 by the Jewish historian Josephus. All extant copies of this work, which all derive from Christian sources, even the recently recovered Arabic version, contain the two passages about Jesus. The authenticity of the Testimonium Flavianum has been disputed since the 17th century, and by the mid 18th century the consensus view was that it was a forgery. The other passage simply mentions Jesus as the brother of James, also known as James the Just. Though most scholars consider this passage genuine [1], its authenticity has been disputed by Emil Schürer as well by several recent popular writers.
Josephus' other major work, The Jewish War, makes no mention of Jesus.
|
Quote:
The idea that ancient data can be discarded unless we possess the autograph is very unfortunate. We possess the autograph for no ancient literary text. Such a principle would dispose of all our information on antiquity.
|
Consider an unbiased source - from an Indian Sikh who studied this history independently:
Quote:
SikhSpectrum.com Quarterly Issue No.26, November 2006
Was Jesus & Christianity Invented by Rome?
Joe Atwill
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A fact often overlooked by historians is that Christianity’s origins are suspicious. During the entire era in which the religion purportedly emerged; another Jewish messianic movement, called the Sicarii, fought in Judea against imperial Rome. This militaristic movement interpreted –- quite logically -- that the same prophecies that the Gospels claim envisioned Jesus, actually predicted the coming of a warrior Messiah who would lead the Jews against Rome. It is unlikely that such a movement would have permitted Jesus, a multicultural and pacifistic “son of David” (Jesus’ philosophy it should be remembered contradicted the original David who was a xenophobic warrior) to have wandered about the Judean countryside teaching his followers to “turn the other cheek” to Roman authority. Further, the Gospels’ literary style is much closer to the popular Greek and Roman romances of the day -- that often featured a hero, empty tombs and resurrection scenes -- than the ascetic style of writing used throughout the Dead Sea Scrolls.
Given the above, perhaps the most natural suspects for the creation of the Gospels would have been the Roman Caesars. Certainly the most likely of the Caesars would have been the Flavian dynasty, which lasted from 69 – 96 CE, the period when most scholars believe at least some of the Gospels were written. It consisted of three Caesars: Vespasian, and his two sons: Titus and Domitian. Flavius Josephus, a Jew who was an adopted member of the royal family was their official historian and wrote War of the Jews, the history of the family’s war against the Sicarii.
Though overlooked by virtually all of New Testament scholarship, this group should be regarded as the prime suspect for the creation of Christianity because they possessed all of the requirements to have done so. They had a strong financial motivation to replace the militaristic religion of the Sicarii that waged war against them with a pro Roman Messiah cult, they were known to have a staff of intellectuals with the expertise in Judaism and philosophy necessary to write the Gospels, and they possessed the knowledge and bureaucracy required to implement a religion (the Flavians created and maintained a number of religions other than Christianity). Moreover, this royal family was the absolute rulers over the territories where the first Christian congregations began and therefore determined which literature was permitted to circulate in the area.
Further, the Flavians should be considered as the creators of the Gospels simply because the victors write history. Many of Jesus’ “prophecies” are regarding the military victories of the Flavian family. These include the destruction of the Galilean fishing villages, Jerusalem being encircled with a wall, and the leveling of the Temple, which were all “brought to pass” by Titus Flavius during his military campaign through Judea, which concluded with his destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple in 70 CE. Titus was also parallel to the Jesus of the Gospels in that he was a “son of God” -– his father had been declared a “diuus” by the Roman Senate following his death -- and he founded religions.
The Flavians are also linked to the origins of Christianity in that a number of royal family members were among the first Christians. In fact, the first Christians for whom there is any archeological evidence were members of the Flavian family. But this begs a question. Why was a cult that advocated poverty and meekness so attractive to a family that practiced neither?
The best known of the “Christian Flavians” was Pope Clement the first –- the Pope who is recorded in early church literature as having been ordained by the Apostle Peter. He is described within the Roman Catholic Encyclopedia as the first Pope about “whom anything definite is known,”[1] and was recorded by early church literature as being a member of the Flavian family. The notion that Pope Clement was a Flavian was recorded in the Acts of Saints Nereus and Achilleus, a fifth or sixth century work based upon even earlier traditions.
Titus’ niece, Flavia Domitilla, was another “Christian Flavian.” In the case of Flavia Domitilla there is extant evidence linking her to Christianity. The oldest Christian burial site in Rome has inscriptions naming her as its founder.
Thus the Flavians are linked to the origins of Christianity by an unusual number of facts. Early Church documents flatly state that the family produced some of the religion’s first martyrs and the Pope who succeeded Peter. They created much of the literature that provided documentation for the religion, were responsible for its oldest known cemetery and housed individuals named in the New Testament within their imperial court. Further, the family was responsible for Jesus’ apocalyptic prophecies having “come to pass.” Certainly some explanation seems to be required for the numerous traditions linking an obscure Judean cult to the imperial family-—connections that included not merely converts to the religion, but, if the Acts of Nereus and Achilleus are to be believed, the direct successor to Peter.
Moreover, in Caesar’s Messiah I presented an even more compelling reason to suspect that the Flavians had created Christianity. Many of the events from Jesus’ ministry seemed to have been based upon events from Titus Flavius’s military campaign through Judea. These parallels between the two “sons of God” -- Jesus and Titus -- not only occurred in the same locations, but in the same sequence. The fact that they occurred in the same order provides strong support for the premise that they were intentionally created, as there are no other examples in literature of a sequence of such clear parallels occurring accidentally.
To just list a few of the parallel experiences shared by the two “sons of God”; both Jesus and Titus’s “ministries” began with “fishing for men” on the Sea of Galilee, then encountered an individual at Gadara whose “one head” contains great wickedness that is unleashed and infects another group which then plunges into the sea and drowns. In both “ministries,” each Gadara tale is followed by the story of a son of Mary who is a human Passover lamb at Jerusalem, and then a tale of a crucifixion of three individuals that features a “good counselor” named Joseph of “Arimathea” who takes one down who miraculously survives, which is followed by the condemnation of a Simon and a sparing of a John at the conclusion of the “ministry.”
As I show in Caesar’s Messiah the point of this parallelism was to create a Roman mockery of the typological technique used in the Judaic literature of the era whereby the life of one person could “foresee” that of another. In other words, the Gospels are actually slyly indicating that the life of Jesus “foresaw” that of the “real” Messiah, Titus Flavius, the conqueror of Judea. As readers of my book may judge for themselves, the pattern of conceptual experiences between Jesus and Titus strongly suggests a Roman origin of the Gospels.
|
Quote:
|
Not sure how this comes into it. If we have second and third century expositions of this kind, this would be evidence that Christians of that period thought their founder was fulfilling this... but... again, not sure how this is relevant.
|
Europe was introduced to the Gospels by far removed people, themsleves reporting 2nd hand reportings of those who heard about an event described in the Gospels - who never witnessed any of the gospel stories. The alledged resurrection is denied by Arabs and muslims; and is reported as subsisting for onlly 1 to 3 days [hardly a resurrection?], reported in the gospels as witnessed by 1 to 3 people [kin folk], and dispiuted by the most credible source of all: the Jews - who were desperate for a messiah at this time, having nominated 5 candidates as potentials. Even Paul, the only historically identifiable figure - never met Jesus, and claims his depictions come not from man but from God! Hardly historical?
Quote:
This appears to suggest that no statement by any European is evidence. If so, I suggest you burn your internet terminal now, smash your lightbulbs and sit in the dark. And... how did you get to Australia, I wonder? <hint>
All the best,
Roger Pearse
|
The net affirms my premise. Europe has a terrible record of false reportings, racism and the highest record of mass murder in all geo-history [even after not factoring the last three worst centuries]: 99.9% of all christian's ancestors were enforced to accept the Gospels, and millions were murdered for not adhering to its required standards;the Jews - being first hand witnesses to what the Gospels was spreading - totally refused to accept any of the scriptures of the NT - and one must be careful before pronouncing the Jews are un-believers!
The vast majority of converted Europeans never read the Gospels, and were fobidden to own a copy for the first 800 years: they got their teachings via employed, contracted and foresworn firey preists. The blood libels and the Protocols - though now known as clever forgeries - was made by Christians - and many believed these charges for centuries, with the murders of 100s of 1000s of Jews.
Basically, I cannot find a single report of the Gospels as historically vindicated - and this is an alarming situation when 2 Billion believe it so genuinely, not least it is the world's most powerful and advanced religious group. It is an anomoly for humanity - not just for one religious group. You have not given any proofs or evidences of anything - the thread subject's premise remains un-dented.
|
02-16-2009, 04:50 AM
