Jack the Bodiless

Magus55:

Are you aware that historians regard the "Testimonium Flavianum" as having been tampered with by a Christian?
Where have I ever said that Jesus did not exist?

And cite the prophecy of his crucifixion. Hint: you won't get far with Psalms 22:16.

And how do you imagine that "Yeshu was hanged" is a prophecy of crucifixion?

Magus55

Some historians reguard that Testimonium to have been tampered with, most don't.

First of all, you mentioned this which i already showed from Pontius Pilate, Thallus, Tacitus, and Josephus that he was in fact crucified - and as note, none of them were christians - they were secular scientists, historians and governers.

There ARE non-Biblical accounts of CHRISTIANS. There are non-Biblical accounts stating that CHRISTIANS believed in the resurrection. There are NO definite non-Biblical accounts of the CRUCIFIXION, and certainly NO non-Biblical accounts of the RESURRECTION.

Here is my quote:

And Jesus Christ the person is a historical fact. There is no question of whether the person himself existed. He was as real as Ceasar and Pontius Pilate.

Here is your answer:

"Baloney"

Now to Yshua was hanged. Hanged in ancient Jewish culture is synonimous to crucifixtion, they described it that way because of how the person was "hanging" on the cross. Crucfixition comes from Latin i think which is why the Jews didn't use that term.

Justin70

Magus55:

The Josephus account has been thoroughly shown to be a forgery. To what extent is a matter of debate, but it's still a very bad Christian addition to say the least. Frank Zindler wrote an article awhile ago that does a very good job of debunking that passage as any sort of 'proof' for 'Jesus history'

http://www.atheists.org/church/didjesusexist.html

Towards the bottom of the ariticle, Zindler does a good job of overviewing the Josephus account. Please read and let us know what you think.

Many apologists try to reconcile the text with what a Jewish person would have said during that time period but I'm one of those that thinks that passage should be removed entirely. Taking the passage out entirely lets the account flow into context. Leaving it in as a mangled 'proof' kills the entire historical context that Josephus is writing about.

Magus55

More fun: from www.christiananswers.net

An interesting study and result:

Many now consider the Resurrection to be one of the most sure and certain events of history. A critical debate on the question "Did Jesus rise from the dead?" took place recently between world-renowned atheistic philosopher, Dr. Anthony Flew, and New Testament scholar and Christian, Dr. Gary Habermas. A panel of five philosophers from leading universities judged the outcome. What was the conclusion? Four votes for Habermas. None for Flew.[1] And one draw. Flew was judged to have retreated into philosophical sophistry while evading the widely-acknowledged historical facts cited by Dr. Habermas.

Maybe the atheist was having a bad day?

12 undeniable facts mentioned at that panel:

These facts (per Habermas) include:[2]



Jesus died due to the rigors of crucifixion.

Jesus was buried.

Jesus' death caused the disciples to despair and lose hope.

Many scholars hold that Jesus' tomb was discovered to be empty just a few days later.

At this time the disciples had real experiences that they believed to be literal experiences of the risen Jesus.

The disciples were transformed from doubters who were afraid to identify with Jesus, to bold proclaimers of his death and resurrection, even being willing to die for this belief.

The resurrection was central to their message.

The resurrection was proclaimed in Jerusalem where the empty tomb was. As a result...

The church was born and grew...

...with Sunday the primary day of worship.

James, Jesus' skeptical brother, was converted by the Resurrection.

Paul, the great persecutor of Christianity, was converted by the Resurrection.



And despite you claiming its invalid, the 500 witnesses are an eye witness testimony to the claim. Since Jewish documents state the empty guarded tomb where Jesus' body went, there should be some record in history to explain where his body went. The reason there isn't is because all those people had nothing to say since Jesus did stand before them.

Another point, Christianity became the official religion of Rome shortly after Jesus' ressurection. Don't you think if only few apostles saw Jesus' ressurection, the Roman government would quite easily say its a hoax? The Roman government was tough and didn't exactly follow anything that discredited the emperor, unless the majority of the citizens couldn't deny the ressurection too. Christianity would have never succeeded had the New Testament been fictional, you don't see 2 billion people running around worshipping Shakespeare, arguably the best fictional writer in history.

Gooch's dad

Magus, just a quick note before I go off to teach my swing dancing class....

What 500 witnesses? Name one. And you claim they are eyewitnesses? Where is their testimony? Anything at all from them? No, just a mention from Paul decades later that there were 500 eyewitnesses. Big deal. That is worth exactly zero for supporting your case.

Any record in that debate as to the religious affiliation of the people judging the debate? And why are philosophers the judges? Why not historians?

Jack the Bodiless

Here is an article about Thallus from the II library. As you can see, virtually nothing is known about him: including the date of his writing, or whether he actually wrote what Christians claim that he wrote.

"The Acts of Pontius Pilate", or the "Gospel of Nicodemus" was written around the close of the third century AD. It is regarded by Christians as a forgery, hence its exclusion from the canon.
This is NOT a prophecy about Jesus! Read the previous chapter! This will come to pass during a time of devastation, an apocalypse very similar to the one in Revelation (including heaven being rolled up like a scroll: the author thought it was a sheet with stars attached).
I believe that Jesus probably DID exist. But many do not, and even I am far from certain. It is "baloney" to suggest that Jesus is "as real" as Caesar and Pontius Pilate. There are MUCh better historical records on those.
And where does the Talmud say that he rose from the dead?

Getting killed is the easy part.

And Christianity didn't become the official religion of Rome for several centuries. Look up "Constantine" in any encyclopaedia.

Justin70

Magus55:

This above point truely is paramount. In order to prove this point you must come up with the documentation on these witnesses. What were their names? What do the documents say?

In a court of law, if my dog was run over by a blue sedan and I say I have 22 witnesses that all saw it, then the judge is going to want to have testimonies for them! Names! Statements! Gonna need that. =) Without that information, I could just be talking out my rectal orifice!

Proof my friend! =) Saying there are 500 people that saw something doesn't say a damned thing. It absolutely BEGS the questions of: Who are they? What did they say? Where is the information? What documents do we have for this information?

In the scientific world we have to back up everything we say with reliable information or our OWN research on the subject. You need to do that! A statement like that without ANY information to prove it is absolutely meaningless and would never hold any water as proof for the resurrection or anything else.

Butters

Exactly how was this detirmined to be a "fact"?

Exactly how was this detirmined to be a "fact"?

Exactly why do these scholars hold this to be a "fact"?

Are you sure that the fact is not that the Catholic church moved their holy day to Sunday much later?

Exactly how was this detirmined to be a "fact"?

I don't think you can even show Biblical support for this statement, Paul WAS a great persecuteor of Christianity, the resurrection didn't impress him at all. Jesus had to appear to him in a vision for him to convert. (It seems that everyone should be accorded the same courtesy, if Paul didn't believe by hearing the word, why should I?)

Dargo

There are miracles recorded in other holy books that were allegedly witnessed by thousands of people. Do you believe that those miracles actually happened? If you are willing to discount the testimony of thousands of alleged witnesses why should we believe 500 alleged witnesses?

Just out of curiosity are you Protestant? If so, you will very skeptical of the miracle claims made for the Catholic saints in spite of how many people supposedly witnessed them.

Asha'man

No, you are wrong about the meaning of “hanging.” You cannot simply re-define a word to suit your own desire or need, especially when the plain literal meaning is so clear.

The ancient Jewish punishment for blasphemy was to stone the person to death, and then hang the corpse on a tree until nightfall. Hanging on a tree was meant quite literally. The law is very clear in Deuteronomy 21:22-23. Hanging on a tree was done after the person was dead, as a warning to others. It was not the cause of death, which is what it would be if they meant crucifiction.

I see no reason to believe that “hanging” really means anything other than “hanging,” when the plain literal meaning makes the most sense.