|
|
|
|
from_the_gym
Mar 22, 2005, 4:17 AM
Post #1 of 51
(998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 20, 2003
Posts: 50
|
Hey everyone,
After reading/browsing community I thought that I would post something along the lines of a research paper that I am doing for school. My research is in the early Christian Church and doctrine. I have found nothing in non-Christian writings that suggests a Jewish preacher from Nazareth even existed. The Bible says he does, but with-out other sources, it requires faith to believe this. (I am not really atheist, more of a cynic)
So lets suppose that Jesus did exist, but did not live the life he did as the Bible tells it. Lets assume he died a normal death, but was incorporated into the Bible as the Savior by the early Church. (lets be truthful here, the Bible has been edited in content since the third century) In support of this i would like to point out that in the dark ages, the Church destroyed many historical documents, which could have included writings to how Christianity began. (Over 200 gospels used to exist, where are they now?)
So my question is this: Where did Christianity get its roots from, how did it begin?
|
|
|
|
|
8flood8
Mar 22, 2005, 4:29 AM
Post #2 of 51
(998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2004
Posts: 1436
|
you might read about the council of nicea.
some of "our" "christian" traditions are not so "christian" in origin.
and some people believe that pieces of the story have been left out. i have heard an argument for reincarnation was left out.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Mar 22, 2005, 5:49 AM
Post #3 of 51
(998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: Hey everyone, After reading/browsing community I thought that I would post something along the lines of a research paper that I am doing for school. My research is in the early Christian Church and doctrine. I have found nothing in non-Christian writings that suggests a Jewish preacher from Nazareth even existed. The Bible says he does, but with-out other sources, it requires faith to believe this. (I am not really atheist, more of a cynic) So lets suppose that Jesus did exist, but did not live the life he did as the Bible tells it. Lets assume he died a normal death, but was incorporated into the Bible as the Savior by the early Church. (lets be truthful here, the Bible has been edited in content since the third century) In support of this i would like to point out that in the dark ages, the Church destroyed many historical documents, which could have included writings to how Christianity began. (Over 200 gospels used to exist, where are they now?) So my question is this: Where did Christianity get its roots from, how did it begin?
There is no doubt that Jesus lived and secular records of his crucifixion certainly exist. As far as the other gospels go, many of the others still exist, but were not incorporated into the New Testament. Perhaps a better question would be why they were not? The best known of the other gospels are probably those of Thomas and the "Q" gospel, which derives from oral tradition and from which the other four established gospels borrow liberally.
For reference, I would recommend reading Jesus, a Revolutionary Biography by John Dominic Crossan of the Jesus Seminar.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
tradman
Mar 22, 2005, 9:16 AM
Post #4 of 51
(998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: 7159
|
Here's a short list of extra-biblical sources for the existence of Jesus Christ:
Cornelius Tacitus
Gaius Suetonius Tranquillas
Flavius Josephus
Pliny the Younger
Emperor Trajan
Emperor Hadrian
The Jewish Talmud
Lucian (the greek playwright)
Mara Bar-Serapion
This is only a very small selection, the existnce of Jesus Christ has been extensivley researched by Christian and secular historians for obvious reasons, and it's not at all difficult to find massive volumes of evidence and references. As Curt said, there really is no doubt at all that he lived. No faith is required.
So there's your answer right there: Christianity's roots are in the life and works of Jesus of Nazareth, a preacher who was crucified by the Roman authorities at the urging of the Jewish religious leadership.
This answer is hardly a secret, it's almost universally accepted, and it's backed up by colossal quantities of evidence, but somehow I get the impression that you're just not going to satisfied with it.
|
|
|
|
|
organic
Mar 22, 2005, 2:11 PM
Post #5 of 51
(998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 16, 2003
Posts: 2215
|
In reply to: Here's a short list of extra-biblical sources for the existence of Jesus Christ: Cornelius Tacitus Gaius Suetonius Tranquillas Flavius Josephus Pliny the Younger Emperor Trajan Emperor Hadrian The Jewish Talmud Lucian (the greek playwright) Mara Bar-Serapion This is only a very small selection, the existnce of Jesus Christ has been extensivley researched by Christian and secular historians for obvious reasons, and it's not at all difficult to find massive volumes of evidence and references. As Curt said, there really is no doubt at all that he lived. No faith is required. So there's your answer right there: Christianity's roots are in the life and works of Jesus of Nazareth, a preacher who was crucified by the Roman authorities at the urging of the Jewish religious leadership. This answer is hardly a secret, it's almost universally accepted, and it's backed up by colossal quantities of evidence, but somehow I get the impression that you're just not going to satisfied with it.
The thing is half of those don't mention Jesus directly and the other half are thought be plagurism from christians!!! come on now.
http://www.infidels.org/...wder/jury/chap5.html
http://home1.gte.net/...gion/appendixd4.html
|
|
|
|
|
taualum23
Mar 22, 2005, 2:39 PM
Post #7 of 51
(998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 2370
|
"preacher who was crucified by the Roman authorities at the urging of the Jewish religious leadership. "
I am curious. What sources state this?
|
|
|
|
|
from_the_gym
Mar 22, 2005, 2:45 PM
Post #8 of 51
(998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 20, 2003
Posts: 50
|
I would like to thank everbody for their listing of sources for me to read; I look foward to them. This post is not and was not meant as a flame war between Christians and Atheists, so dont start guys and girls.
Once again, thankyou for the sources relating to the life of Jesus. Basically, i havent been able to find anything relating to his life that is not a biblical referance.
An argument i came across for all those interested: Does the mentioning of Christ in any early writing actually mean Jesus of Nazareth? We know the early Christians worshipped a messiah, but does this mean that that messiah was Jesus in the early years of Christianity? I am not done reading the book (The Jesus Puzzle: Earl Doherty), but it seems to question this. Anyone?
|
|
|
|
|
taualum23
Mar 22, 2005, 3:02 PM
Post #10 of 51
(998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 2370
|
In reply to: In reply to: I am curious. What sources state this? Have you ever heard of a book called "The Bible"? It goes into quite a bit of detail about the incident.
Oh, I thought you had actual sources. I could write a book that says Jesus was a giant Rooster who likes to eat band-aids. Wouldn't make it true.
I was more looking for the historical record that Curt alluded to, that shows the actual man Jesus of Nazareth did, indeed exist, and his teachings are the basis for Christianity and other interesting sects of Judaism. Do any of THESE sources make the Jews out to be the ones who wanted Jesus dead, as oposed to the Romans? As sources, please do not quote either The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion or The Passion of the Christ. If I wanted hate-speech labeled as "truth" by lunatics I would read stormfront.org.
|
|
|
|
|
taualum23
Mar 22, 2005, 3:31 PM
Post #12 of 51
(998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 2370
|
In reply to: Well, thankyou once again for showing us that you've no real intention of considering the evidence. Do you actually have proof that the biblical accounts of christ are lies? Or are you just shouting "liar" because you can't think of anything else to shout? Tell you what, I'll humour you. In reply to: At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And his conduct was good and he was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that he had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that he was alive; accordingly, he was perhaps the messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders. Flavius Josephus was Emperor Vespasian's court historian and was alive from 37-97 AD. But I'll bet you knew that already didn't you? Being so clever and all.
Thank you for humoring me, and for once again showing that you don't read posts. Your historian's accoutn says that Pilate condemned him to be crucified, no the "jewish religious leadership" like you said earlier. That is what I am asking of "proof" of. What year did JC get crucified? 29? 39? Ol' flavious was a little bit young to write a first hand account, methinks. Not only that, iIF he does later say it was the Jews, wouldn't you be less than liekly to accept a Roman's account of the event if trying to blame a Jew for something a Roman did? If not, may I point you to a great deal of Left wing propoganda that I am sure you will accept as fact because it is written.
I NEVER claimed that the stories in the Bible are LIES. I don't think the Cinderella STORY is a LIE either. It is a story. I don't think stories of the Pookah, the wood nymphs, Moses, Mohammed, Jesus, Buddha or any of their techings are LIES. I think they are STORIES that help people relate to the world. The fact that he lived is unimportant to me, except insofar as his followers helped form a good deal of modern western civilization. The fact that Jews are blamed for it still, and the basis of this blame made up, bothers me.
Do you have PROOF that Jesus was not a giant Jewish Rooster, or are you just yelling "liar"? If I had PROOF that the Bible's account was incorrect, would you beleive it? I am betting no, because faith is stronger than that.
|
|
|
|
|
tradman
Mar 22, 2005, 3:58 PM
Post #14 of 51
(998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: 7159
|
Come on, mister "Voice of Intelligent Dissent".
You think you're intelligent, surely you should have no problems providing proof. Come on, let's start with some proof that Josephus' account was "propaganda".
Where's your intelligence? We're all waiting to see it.
|
|
|
|
|
tradman
Mar 22, 2005, 4:29 PM
Post #15 of 51
(998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: 7159
|
Still waiting!
This thread keeps getting bumped, and folks are wondering why you haven't demonstrated your presumably startling intelligence yet!
Come on taualum23, you're so clever that you know what's "truth" and what's not, aren't you!
Why not post up some original thoughts - you do have original thoughts I'm sure, very intelligent ones - and amaze us all?
|
|
|
|
|
organic
Mar 22, 2005, 4:47 PM
Post #16 of 51
(998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 16, 2003
Posts: 2215
|
tradman you need to calm down, the fact is there is not only one manuscript of flavius Josephus and most modern biblical experts discount the sentence about Jesus because it is not in other versions, making people think it was added later. As for many of the other references they only mention Christ, which is akin to saying great religious leader. We could be talking about Gandhi, Buddha, Mohamed I mean it is such a general term to take that as fact that it was Jesus is crazy, if you are trying to use that as evidence it is very weak.
Lastly historical records were not lacking at the time yet even if Jospehus did write the very questionable passage, one sentence, only one was written about the savior of mankind? In a historical perspective naming him directly. Not that Jesus could not have been or was not but the evidence you provide is very weak.
|
|
|
|
|
vivalargo
Mar 22, 2005, 4:50 PM
Post #17 of 51
(998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 26, 2002
Posts: 1512
|
Tradman, I swear to God I will buy you a case of beer (or 7Up or whatever) if you have the sac to ask one honest question--meaning there is something in this discussion that you actually want to know as opposed to militantly sticking solely with what you do know (which is considerable, no question). When you never ask questions we peons felt preached at (sadly, I have the same tendency) and might write you off as closed-minded.
Surely you are curious about SOMETHING per Jesus, who is, always has been and always will have an element of mystery surrounding him, wouldn't you say?
JL
|
|
|
|
|
taualum23
Mar 22, 2005, 4:53 PM
Post #18 of 51
(998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 2370
|
Wow! This is great. You've convinced me. Everything you say is true and right. I've been such a fool!!!
PLEASE go read my post that started you off. I asked for documentation (not proof, jsut asked which souces said it) that the urging of the Jewish Religious leaders was behind the crucufuction of Jesus. Your "proof" was that the Bible says so. I am not going to engage you in debate based upon "the Bible says so." There is no point.
Josephus' account of the existance of such a man is great, thank you. It didn't come anywhere close tomentioning what I asked for. If (note IF) he did write about the Jews having the Romans kill Jesus (becasue we know the romans were all about listening to whatever the Jews said...Mel Gibson says so) then it would be akin to believing whatever anybody writes when blaming someone ELSE for something that some believe THEY did. Do you follow this? I can send you a picture diagram if you need one.
So you can stop sending me PM's, and you can stop bumping "my" thread. I have no PROOF the bible is untrue. It is a lovely book of stories. Just because it is written, doesn't make it so. I'm sorry your faith can not take critical inspection, and that you become so upset at someone else questioning it. I have questioned my beliefs. Deeply and seriously. I have looked into my heart, my mid, my family's traditions, and as detailed a history of the world, its people's and their faiths as I could. And I have come to my own beliefs. Have you?
Me demanding proof that Jesus wasn't a Rooster was me using an example. Just because something is written down, and not disproved, does not MAKE IT true.
You see? I was not claiming Jesus was never alive, not that he was crucified. It is not what I said, not is it what I asked fro proof of. The historical evidence makes it more than likely that he DID live, and that HE WAS crucified. Beyond that, The historical evidence becomes more mixed with fable, faith and religion. History and religion are often too intertwined to be trustworthy.
Now, get back to flaming me for believing differently than you. Please remember to poiunt out that I hate Christians and blame them for everything. Ignore the fact that I speak out agianst bigots and extremists, not Christians. If it sounds like I am anti-Christian, I truly apologize to all of my Christian friends. I am anti-extremist of nearly all varieties. I am also anti-stupid, and in that way, I am a bigot.
|
|
|
|
|
organic
Mar 22, 2005, 5:01 PM
Post #20 of 51
(998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 16, 2003
Posts: 2215
|
tradman: just because something cannot be proved false does not make it true.
Question: there are 49 trillion stars in the universe. You cannot prove it false so does that make it true?
|
|
|
|
|
tradman
Mar 22, 2005, 5:02 PM
Post #21 of 51
(998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 14, 2003
Posts: 7159
|
In reply to: Surely you are curious about SOMETHING per Jesus, who is, always has been and always will have an element of mystery surrounding him, wouldn't you say?
Actually, I have surprisingly little interest in the historical aspects of Christ's life. The history is just the gross physical events - I'm a lot more interested in the spiritual aspects of Christianity.
Yeah, there are questions though, particularly concerning Jesus' relationships with those around him, but nothing really worth debating I think.
|
|
|
|
|
taualum23
Mar 22, 2005, 5:04 PM
Post #22 of 51
(998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2002
Posts: 2370
|
In reply to: In reply to: I am not going to engage you in debate based upon "the Bible says so." There is no point. Well, since you yourself have admitted that you have no proof that the Bible is untrue, doesn't that make it a valid source? And if it's a valid source then why are you discounting it? You're supposed to be intelligent, let's see you demonstrate it just once.
Are you serious? I mean, this is getting to the point I am going to call troll. If you've just been throwing it out, and I've been eating up the troll, man, do I feel silly, I should know that no one....oh, damn, no, you've proven that wrong before...
"Well, since you yourself have admitted that you have no proof that the Bible is untrue, doesn't that make it a valid source?
And if it's a valid source then why are you discounting it?"
This is not how logic works. This is not how reality works. Think it through. I know, it will take a few days, but You can do it. Thinking is when things happen inyour brain and DON'T say them for a few mintues.
I have a buddy in Edinburgh who can come help you out with some of the basics of thought, if you would like. He is a deeply religious Christian and a philosophy and logic professor.
You have no proof that my diagram showing jesus was a Robot was untrue. Is it a valid source? NO! (again, this is an example, I do NOT believe jesus was a robot any more or less than he came back from the dead).
The Bible is a valid source of stories. So is my book of the Borthers Grimm.
Oh, and really now, enough with the PM's. I get it. You disagree and would like me to prove that the Bible is false. That much is clear. Now take a valium and calm down. You're going to hurt yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
vivalargo
Mar 22, 2005, 5:05 PM
Post #23 of 51
(998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 26, 2002
Posts: 1512
|
In reply to: In reply to: I am not going to engage you in debate based upon "the Bible says so." There is no point. Well, since you yourself have admitted that you have no proof that the Bible is untrue, doesn't that make it a valid source? And if it's a valid source then why are you discounting it? You're supposed to be intelligent, let's see you demonstrate it just once.
Dude, where's your HONEST QUESTION, to anyone, about anything?
You gonna make us beg??
I gotta a bet on this one, so don't let me down Tradman!
JL
|
|
|
|
|
dookie
Mar 22, 2005, 5:08 PM
Post #25 of 51
(998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 25, 2003
Posts: 3528
|
the bible also says a lot of other stuff we know not necessarily to be true. The Earth and heavens were created in 7 days. Science has shown that is most certainly not the case, but the bible says it's so right? Perhaps a day in the bible is really not a day at all. So therefore parts of the bible we take to be accurate historical accounts, and other parts not so? Makes it kind of confusing.
Trad, you seem to get offended whenever anyone has a different feeling about religion than you. Right off the bat in this thread you even made a jab at the original poster without any reason.
Sorry, but it makes you look like as much of a bigot as those you so like to argue with about it all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
