Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
02-20-2008, 03:09 AM | #21 | |||
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
|
The Tacitus reference is 1400 years too late
Quote:
Quote:
Best wishes, Pete Brown |
|||
02-20-2008, 03:42 AM | #22 |
Regular Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Germany
Posts: 267
|
|
02-20-2008, 04:38 AM | #23 |
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
Even if the passage inTacitus is a forgery, Ehrman's statement is still mis-leading. The passage does not mention Jesus.
|
02-20-2008, 08:06 AM | #24 | |||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Birmingham UK
Posts: 4,876
|
Quote:
Andrew Criddle |
|||
02-20-2008, 07:18 PM | #25 | ||
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
Quote:
If Christus was 25 years old, was beheaded at the Dead Sea and his mother's name Yram, then it would be obvious that Christus was not Jesus of Nazareth. And all these things could have happened during the reign of Tiberius by order of Pilate. And the word "Christ" means "the anointed or anointed with oil" and the word "the anointed", in Hebrew, was used hundreds of years before Jesus of Nazareth. "I am the Anointed one" can be "I am Christus" or "I am the Christ." It is foolhardy to think that anywhere the word "Christ" appears that it must mean Jesus Christ of Nazareth. |
||
02-25-2008, 04:34 AM | #26 | ||
Regular Member
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Munich Germany
Posts: 434
|
Quote:
|
||
02-26-2008, 11:31 AM | #28 | ||
Contributor
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
|
Quote:
I don't recall that he ever said anything that definitive. |
||
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|