arnoldo

Here is a historical detail. . .

I give thee charge in the sight of God, who quickeneth all things, and before Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed a good confession;

aa5874

The Paul in Timothy may have been another Paul. Either some or all the Pauls are fake.

Tyro

Of course generally accepted interpretations can be wrong, but this one is not. Please learn Latin before even trying to question it! Interpreting English translations will of course do no good. Pliny apparently thought that an opportunity for repentence would make former Christians go back to the old Roman rites. That is not a sollution, but merely a suggestion, if even that, and thus Pliny wrote to the emperor. If the sacrafice part would have been about Christians, "it seems possible, however, to check and cure it [the superstition]" and "From hence it is easy to imagine what multitudes may be reclaimed from this error, if a door be left open to repentance." would be nonsense. Still you have shown no evidence of any Christian sacrificing, or even Jewish sacraficing, outside Jerusalem.

Tyro

Even if this claim was true, Pliny were not contemporary to the Christ figure of the Christians. Tacitus says Christus was executed during the reign of Pilate and Tiberius. During this time Pliny was not alive. This is not "proving a negative", but simply stating facts. The Christus of Tacitus, which the Christiani believed in (historical or not) died when Tiberius was emperor, many years before Pliny. They were not contemporary. Please skip the unsubstantiated and stupid claims, and go on discussing the important ones, please.

In 115 CE there was a story, about the Christ having been executed during the reign of Tiberius, circulating. Other Christian documents (since there is no reason to think there were different sects called Christiani - Ockham's razor!) prove that this was Christ Jesus. Whether or not this story is historical truth is not what is discussed here, but if there was a story predating Pliny and Tacitus. The Pauline epistles show there were indeed claims made, that Christ Jesus was crucified, buried and arose from the dead. Some kind of Christ Jesus story apparently did exist. Tacitus cannot have invented it.

judge

Who was trying to prove Jesus did exist?

Tyro

Probably noone, since noone denied it...

ynquirer

Your most balanced reference concludes, from Josephus, the historicity of Jesus.

As regard Steve Mason, I don’t find his discussion to be particularly revealing. Ken Olson’s, for instance, is a stronger one IMO. Yet the main point is not the strength of such and such writers, whether on one side or the other. The main point is Peter Kirby’s appraisal of the topic:

Your own conclusion that "The final result has to be that the passage in Antiquities is not credible," looks like a misrepresentation as well.

Tristan Scott

Bullshit.

The entire 16th ch of Clement is about Jesus the teacher.

How about Polycarp 2.3 where remembering the words which the Lord spake, as He taught; Judgenot that ye be not judged, etc, etc.

Read 9.6 of the Didache, you know where it talks about the knowledge god gave them through his son Jesus H. Christ.

Hang on , my ass, next you'll be claiming that they didn't say he lived in the first century.

Tristan Scott

Your right, I can't prove that Jesus and Pliny were not contemporaries, however it does seem unlikely.

Tristan Scott

If all the Pauls are fake, who was the "real" Paul?