MrMacSon

Ha; the 'appeal-to-belief' fallacy.

We're not talking about all: as you acknowledge .....
although there is no extra-biblical evidence for actions of a 'real Jesus'

Diogenes the Cynic

Josephus and Tacitus are extra-Biblical evidence. For that matter, the Gospel of Thomas and 1 Clement are extra-Biblical evidence.

jdl

1 Clement is thoroughly dependent on the NT. It's "extra-biblical" only in the sense that it's not in the canon.

Joseph

mountainman

Hi Philosopher Jay,

I think the thread comparing the historicity of Jesus to that of the Loch Ness Monster has been at least equalled in this post.

I do not have much time at the moment to check all these facts about Dracula. One thing I would be interested in finding out however, if your research has happened to cover it, is whether anyone has found the "One True Stake" with which Dracula was impaled.


Best wishes



Pete







It's a step in what may be the right direction.


The earliest Christian literature was "found in the archives" by Eusebius who was the earliest official Christian heresiologist and pseudo-historian. The history of Eusebius may be fictional as well.

mountainman

Josephus was most likely hacked by Eusebius in the 4th century.
Tacitus was probably hacked in the 15th century.
There are negative aspects to this evidence.


So are the Clementine and Ignatian forgeries and the letter Jesus to Agbar and the letter exchange between "Dear Paul" and Seneca.


And despite hypotheses to the contrary by the planets most revered biblical scholars, the Gospel of Thomas is not necessarily attested before the 4th century. Eusebius cites Hippolytus (155-235), Refutation of all Heresies, v. 1-6., as mentioning something similar to the received text, and cites Origen as mentioning some text of Thomas. Eusebius cites saying (No. 2 in the gThomas) as quoted by Clement of Alexandria (Miscellenies ii. 45. 5; v. 96.3), as coming from the Gospel according to the Hebrews. There is certainly some ambiguity here.

See specifically Two Gnostic Gospels, by Robert M. Grant, Journal of Biblical Literature > Vol. 79, No. 1, Mar., 1960
On the Gospel of Thomas:


Also see The Naming of the Naassenes: Hippolytus, Refutatio V. 6-10 as Hieros Logos, by Mark J. Edwards, Zeitschrift für Papyrologie und Epigraphik, Bd. 112, (1996) (pp. 74-80)

aa5874

Your claim is erroneous. Not even Skeptics or Apolgetics used Josephus and Tacitus as evidence for Jesus for hundreds of years.

We know when they were forged.

The writings of Josephus was supposedly written in the 1st century yet No aplogetic sources used Antiquities of the Jews until the 3rd century and NOT one Skeptic ever used Josephus to PROVE Jesus was human as HJers are doing today.

When Christians writers like the authors of gMatthew, gLuke, gJohn, and Tertullian, Justin, Irenaeus were Claiming Jesus had NO human father and was Born of the Holy Ghost and was God the Creator NO SKEPTIC at ALL for antiquity EVER used Josephus and Tacitus--None.

For possibly a THOUSAND years or more after Josephus and Tacitus, NO SKEPTIC argued against the Holy Ghost birth of Jesus using Antiquities of the Jews 20.9.1 and Tacitus Annals 15,44--NONE.

Only recently have Skeptics started to use them. Why ONLY recently??? Did NOT the Skeptics of a THOUSAND years After Josephus and Tacitus have Antiquities of the Jews and Annals???

They had NOTHING.

If Skeptics had those forgeries they would have DESTROYED all claims that Jesus was DIVINE.

Celsus would have been DELIGHTED if Antiquities and Annals were already forged by the time he wrote "True Discourse". Celsus would have EXPOSED that Jesus wa NOT the Son of a Holy Ghost but was human.

Please name the first Skeptic or non-apologetic source that mentioned Antiquities or Annals with a character called Jesus.


If Josephus and Tacitus did ever claim Jesus was a Man then the Church writers would have had to ATTACK them and called them LIARS PRECISELY the same way Origen called CELSUS a Liar for claiming Jesus was Historical-just a man.

Antiquities 20.9.1, 18.3.3 and Tacitus Annal 15.44 are BLATANT forgeries and were NOT available to SKEPTICS at all like people of today.

sotto voce

The moon landings were all staged, too.

andrewcriddle

Hi Jay

I agree she probably only killed a few women, probably without premeditation, when she let ill-treatment get out of hand.

Her reputation for, (mostly non-lethal), cruelty allowed her to be framed as a mass killer. That doesn't really make her innocent though.

Andrew Criddle

jdboy

What? Now you're saying that the forgeries in Josephus destroy the divine
jesus. How?

aa5874

Your question has caught me by surprise. I am taken aback. I am astonished.

Please if Jesus did actually exist he could ONLY BE HUMAN.

This is so basic that I am extremely worried.

Please, when CELSUS argued Jesus was a man Origen claimed CELSUS invented LIES SIMPLY because he refused to accept that Jesus was the Son of a Holy Ghost

If Josephus had claimed Jesus was a man then OBVIOUSLY the very Church writers would have to DENOUNCE Josephus as a LIAR.

Origen "Against Celsus" utterly destroys all claims that Josephus wrote about a human Jesus.

Please, examine the words of Origen.

Against Celsus 1 If Josephus claim Jesus was a man born of a man and a woman then he would have INVENTED a Falsehood and Called a LIAR

There are NO arguments against Josephus by Apologetic sources where he is called a LIAR for claiming Jesus was an ordinary man for 1800 years and counting.

And for hundreds upon hundreds of years NO SKEPTIC used Josephus to show Jesus NOT Divine.