steve_bnk

And again, there is none. I'd assume if you were as knowledgeable as you present yourself on the NT you would know that.

So again, are you skeptic or believer and what is your point? Do you wish to disprove an HJ?

aa5874

You are NOT the ONLY poster here. If you have NOTHING, if you have NO historical sources of antiquity WITH DETAILS for HJ then PERHAPS some-one else does.

In the NT, GABRIEL was an Angel.

In the NT, Jesus the Child of a Ghost was RAISED from the dead.

Where is the historical source of antiquity WITH DETAILS about HJ?

The question is rather simple.

HJers give the impression that they have historical sources of antiquity WITH DETAILS of HJ.

steve_bnk

'...HJers give the impression that they have historical sources of antiquity WITH DETAILS of HJ...'

Name one who is not religious. By HJr do refer to skeptics for believers.

mountainman

The problem is far more insidious. Even atheists may choose to support and argue for an historical Jesus on the basis of what they have been taught in the field of history dominated in all previous centuries by biblical historians.

The problem requires a fresh approach to the ancient historical evidence, and cannot avoid some form of historical revisionism. If the historical jesus did not exist, and we have no evidence before the 4th century, and everything has the signature of "MYTH-ALL-THE-WAY-DOWN", and if in fact the Historical Source for Details of HJ are the source called "Eusebius", then the obvious question to ask is was the myth fabricated in the 4th century (and revised in the 5th by the victors) as part of a "New Revolution".

steve_bnk

I believe there was likely an historical figure for the reasons I stated. One's anti-religious bias may preclude some from considering the possibility.

aa5874

Please deal with the question of the OP.

It is ALREADY known people Believe ALL sorts of things about Jesus but now it is time to PRODUCE the historical source of antiquity WITH DETAILS of HJ.

Whether or NOT Pilate existed, in the NT he was DESCRIBED as a Governor of Judea in the 15th year of the reign of Tiberius.

Whether or NOT Caiaphas existed, in the NT he was DESCRIBED as a High Priest of Judea.

Whether or NOT Gabriel existed, in the NT Gabriel was DESCRIBED as an ANGEL.

Whether or NOT Jesus existed, in the NT he was DESCRIBED as the Child of a Ghost, the Word that was God and the Creator of heaven and earth.

The NT contains DETAILS of many of the characters found in the very Canon.

Again, this OP is simply asking for an historical source of antiquity WITH DETAILS of HJ.

It is REALLY irrelevant if you BELIEVE there was an HJ or NOT in this thread since I am only trying to FIRST FIND the DETAILS of HJ from a source of antiquity.

jgoodguy

However there is the pesky problem of the name and minimal history. Why not pure myth and no earthy history? Why the name? Is it a late invention or a survivor of redaction.

dog-on

Yahweh Saves is not a strange name for a savior. I guess if his name was Fred, or Howard, the question of the name might be a bit more interesting.

aa5874

Again, this thread is NOT about what people BELIEVE. It is ALREADY known people will BELIEVE all sorts of things about Jesus.

This thread is asking for an historical source of antiquity WITH DETAILS of HJ.

We can SORT out whether or NOT Yahweh, HJ or Timothy existed at some other time.

In gMark, there is NO description of Pilate.

If someone wants to argue that PILATE in gMark was a FISHERMAN or an ANGEL then it would be expected that there was an historical source of antiquity WITH DETAILS which DESCRIBED PILATE as a FISHERMAN or an ANGEL.

This is a BASIC expectation.

In gMark, the HIGH Priest was NOT named.

If someone wants to argue that the High Priest in gMark was NAMED Gabriel or Daniel then it would be EXPECTED that there was an historical source of antiquity WITH DETAILS that the High Priest in gMark was named GABRIEL or DANIEL.

These are BASIC expectations.

So, before we start arguing about HJ let us FIRST get the historical source of antiquity WITH DETAILS of HJ.

So far, NO-ONE here is arguing that PILATE in gMark was a FISHERMAN or an ANGEL since there is no historical source of antiquity with such DETAILS.

So far, NO-ONE here is arguing that the High Priest was NAMED Gabriel or Daniel since there is no historical source of antiquity with such DETAILS.

I don't want any argument on this thread about HJ.

I just want to get the historical source of antiquity WITH DETAILS of HJ.

dog-on

I suppose you have those tired old warhorses of the Christian arsenal, Tacitus and Josephus. Beyond those highly questionable hearsay accounts, you got nothing.