Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
04-28-2012, 09:42 PM | #21 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: South Pacific
Posts: 559
|
Quote:
Quote:
although there is no extra-biblical evidence for actions of a 'real Jesus' |
||
04-28-2012, 09:53 PM | #22 |
Moderator -
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Twin Cities, Minnesota
Posts: 4,639
|
Josephus and Tacitus are extra-Biblical evidence. For that matter, the Gospel of Thomas and 1 Clement are extra-Biblical evidence.
|
04-28-2012, 10:51 PM | #23 |
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Auckland
Posts: 85
|
|
04-28-2012, 10:54 PM | #24 | ||
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
|
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 Quote:
It's a step in what may be the right direction. Quote:
|
||
04-28-2012, 11:03 PM | #25 | |||
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Falls Creek, Oz.
Posts: 11,192
|
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. Quote:
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: Quote:
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) Quote:
|
|||
04-28-2012, 11:18 PM | #26 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
Quote:
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. |
|
04-29-2012, 05:04 AM | #27 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 3,057
|
The moon landings were all staged, too.
|
04-29-2012, 06:28 AM | #28 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Birmingham UK
Posts: 4,876
|
Quote:
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 |
|
04-29-2012, 09:13 AM | #29 | ||
Regular Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: NW United States
Posts: 155
|
Quote:
jesus. How? |
||
04-29-2012, 02:12 PM | #30 | ||
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
Quote:
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 Quote:
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. |
||
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|