steeng said
Roman Senator Tacitus mentions Jesus’s crucifixion by Pontius Pilate.Dose this give credence to the Jesus story?
** you do not have permission to see this link **
The 6 million bibles in print, 2 billion modern followers of Jesus, and the 2000 years of consistent stories are very weighty evidence for all the natural and supernatural events in the bible. Objectively speaking, those who doubt that Jesus of Nazareth ever lived are so far on the fringe that they’re right out there with those who say the moon walks were faked.
steeng said
Roman Senator Tacitus mentions Jesus’s crucifixion by Pontius Pilate.Dose this give credence to the Jesus story?
** you do not have permission to see this link **
No, it does not give credence to the Jesus story.
Was Tacitus mentioning the crucifixion by Pontius Pilate because that crucifixion was recorded somewhere in Roman records?
Was Tacitus repeating the rumor?
The 6 million bibles in print, 2 billion modern followers of Jesus, and the 2000 years of consistent stories are very weighty evidence for all the natural and supernatural events in the bible.
According to the American Bible Society, between 1815 and 1975 approximately 2.5 billion copies of the Bible were printed. I own a NRSV, a couple KJVs, a copy of the Tyndale Bible and a dog eared Good News for Modern Man (with groovy illustrations). And I’m not even a Christian! Check your figures.
I would also point out the obvious fact that many of the two billion Christians disagree vehemently with each other on items of dogma and practice. So much so that one could suspect they hardly belong to the same religion. They can’t all be right but they could certainly all be wrong.
There are 1 billion Hindus in the world. They must be half right.
Objectively speaking, those who doubt that Jesus of Nazareth ever lived are so far on the fringe that they’re right out there with those who say the moon walks were faked.
Mythicists aren’t crazy. They’ve just drawn the wrong conclusion from a series of facts. You should be more kind. Some day believing in talking snakes and people rising from the dead will be a “fringe” view. For four thousand years men and women sought salvation through the figure of Osiris and now he’s just a name in a history book. Don’t you realize the same thing will happen to Jesus?
steeng said
Roman Senator Tacitus mentions Jesus’s crucifixion by Pontius Pilate.Dose this give credence to the Jesus story?
** you do not have permission to see this link **
Most scholars consider the Tacitus passage authentic for a variety of reasons.
The fire of Rome is held to be historic and is multiply attested. According to Paul’s letter, he did not found the communities in Rome, suggesting the existence of Christian communities in Rome in the early sixties. In Rome all traces of Paul disappear, suggesting that there really was a persecution after the fire. Luke seems to know that Paul lived two years on from some time in the early sixties.
I think this is another lost mythicist claim.
Stephen said
The 6 million bibles in print, 2 billion modern followers of Jesus, and the 2000 years of consistent stories are very weighty evidence for all the natural and supernatural events in the bible.According to the American Bible Society, between 1815 and 1975 approximately 2.5 billion copies of the Bible were printed. I own a NRSV, a couple KJVs, a copy of the Tyndale Bible and a dog eared Good News for Modern Man (with groovy illustrations). And I’m not even a Christian! Check your figures.
I would also point out the obvious fact that many of the two billion Christians disagree vehemently with each other on items of dogma and practice. So much so that one could suspect they hardly belong to the same religion. They can’t all be right but they could certainly all be wrong.
There are 1 billion Hindus in the world. They must be half right.
Objectively speaking, those who doubt that Jesus of Nazareth ever lived are so far on the fringe that they’re right out there with those who say the moon walks were faked.
Mythicists aren’t crazy. They’ve just drawn the wrong conclusion from a series of facts. You should be more kind. Some day believing in talking snakes and people rising from the dead will be a “fringe” view. For four thousand years men and women sought salvation through the figure of Osiris and now he’s just a name in a history book. Don’t you realize the same thing will happen to Jesus?
Yes, I saw that “million” versus “billion” error upon re-reading it.
The fact that there are 1 billion Hindus is evidence that they’re right. No disputing it. Whether they’re closer to whatever the truth might be than the 2 billion Christians and their 6 billion Bibles is subject to debate. But the preponderance of evidence sides with the Christians and the Bible.
You have to forgive those scientists who wrote about the talking snake. It was the best science of its day. And it did correctly identify that modern humans once existed in a form where they had no clothing and no self-awareness. That part is 100% in accordance with modern science, but it was first written 6,000 years ago. 
Matt2239 said
Yes, I saw that “million” versus “billion” error upon re-reading it.
The fact that there are 1 billion Hindus is evidence that they’re right. No disputing it. Whether they’re closer to whatever the truth might be than the 2 billion Christians and their 6 billion Bibles is subject to debate. But the preponderance of evidence sides with the Christians and the Bible.
You have to forgive those scientists who wrote about the talking snake. It was the best science of its day. And it did correctly identify that modern humans once existed in a form where they had no clothing and no self-awareness. That part is 100% in accordance with modern science, but it was first written 6,000 years ago.
At the time our ancestors had no self-awareness, they were not “modern humans” 🙂 In fact, far from it.
gavriel said
At the time our ancestors had no self-awareness, they were not “modern humans” 🙂 In fact, far from it.
They didn’t need fig leaves. They didn’t till the land. The female was not encumbered with babies whose heads were so big they always experienced pain in childbirth. Simpler times for humans with smaller brains. Genesis was the best science of its day.
Matt2239 said
They didn’t need fig leaves. They didn’t till the land. The female was not encumbered with babies whose heads were so big they always experienced pain in childbirth. Simpler times for humans with smaller brains. Genesis was the best science of its day.
The Greek had better astronomy, and the idea that painful/lethal child bearing goes back to some original sin does not look like “science” to me. Genesis contains mostly theologically motivated speculation mixed with folk tales.
gavriel said
The Greek had better astronomy, and the idea that painful/lethal child bearing goes back to some original sin does not look like “science” to me. Genesis contains mostly theologically motivated speculation mixed with folk tales.
Its connection to original sin is theology, but the recognition that modern humans descended from simpler humans with smaller heads is a big deal. I mean, they were about 6000 years ahead of Darwin. As for original sin, awareness of what is wrong would have developed as the brain size expanded, so the coincidental expansion of the brain and the dawn of sin would seem connected.
Genesis was the best science of its day.
Matt2239 said
Its connection to original sin is theology, but the recognition that modern humans descended from simpler humans with smaller heads is a big deal. I mean, they were about 6000 years ahead of Darwin. As for original sin, awareness of what is wrong would have developed as the brain size expanded, so the coincidental expansion of the brain and the dawn of sin would seem connected.
Genesis was the best science of its day.
They did not recognize that humans descended from simpler humans. They claimed that man was created during an act of instantaneous creation. At the same time they believed that Law-abidingness would secure a healthy and long life. To solve this dilemma, they invented the special original sin of Eve.
Matt2239 said
The 6 million bibles in print, 2 billion modern followers of Jesus, and the 2000 years of consistent stories are very weighty evidence for all the natural and supernatural events in the bible. Objectively speaking, those who doubt that Jesus of Nazareth ever lived are so far on the fringe that they’re right out there with those who say the moon walks were faked.
Don’t mistake fact belief and faith for fact. As mentioned, there are 1.5 billion muslims in the world. Because there are 1.5 billion of them, does that make their faith true?
As for consistent stories, do you read the gospels? Sure they are great evidence for the existence of a man named Jesus, together with non-christian sources and ancient archaeology, but they’re pretty crummy sources for proof of his divinity. They can’t even agree on basic details, of his life and ministry, such as names of the apostles, or where and how he appeared to his followers, or what day he died, or what he said, etc…
Rokyro said
Don’t mistake fact belief and faith for fact. As mentioned, there are 1.5 billion muslims in the world. Because there are 1.5 billion of them, does that make their faith true?
Yes, the 1.5 billion Muslims in the world are evidence for the truthfulness of their faith. We also have billions of people saying the moon landings took place. If you challenge either a Muslim’s faith or the moon walk believers, they’ll each eventually direct you to a book that says so.
Matt2239 said
Rokyro said
Don’t mistake fact belief and faith for fact. As mentioned, there are 1.5 billion muslims in the world. Because there are 1.5 billion of them, does that make their faith true?Yes, the 1.5 billion Muslims in the world are evidence for the truthfulness of their faith. We also have billions of people saying the moon landings took place. If you challenge either a Muslim’s faith or the moon walk believers, they’ll each eventually direct you to a book that says so.
Hmmm, don’t want to put words in your mouth, but are you saying that the amount of people who believe something is significant, perhaps critical element, in verifying something’s veracity? The moon landings and say, Mohammed’s ascenion to heaven on a horse have the same probablity of being historical facts, because many people believe in them? Documentary evidence, indepdent attetestations, testimonials in relation to the closeness of the event, etc… don’t count for anything?
On the other hand, if all you’re saying is that we know 1.5 billion muslims believe in the Quran as a holy document, then yes, I agree that is a fact, and there is mountains of great evidence to prove it. But that is very different from claiming that the contents of the book they believe in were actual historical events that occurred.
…but are you saying that the amount of people who believe something is significant, perhaps critical element, in verifying something’s veracity? The moon landings and say, Mohammed’s ascenion to heaven on a horse have the same probablity of being historical facts, because many people believe in them? Documentary evidence, indepdent attetestations, testimonials in relation to the closeness of the event, etc… don’t count for anything?
Yep, Matt2239 is a post-modernist.
Rokyro said
Documentary evidence, indepdent attetestations, testimonials in relation to the closeness of the event, etc… don’t count for anything?
Yes, these things count for a lot. So do basic, objective facts. Why would you believe facts as cited in a book that appeared 10 years ago to a book that appeared 2000 years ago and remains in print? One answer is authoritarianism.
Matt2239 said
Rokyro said
Documentary evidence, indepdent attetestations, testimonials in relation to the closeness of the event, etc… don’t count for anything?Yes, these things count for a lot. So do basic, objective facts. Why would you believe facts as cited in a book that appeared 10 years ago to a book that appeared 2000 years ago and remains in print? One answer is authoritarianism.
All right then, moving the goalposts from something is true because of how many people it to how old a document is. If that were the case then the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is more trustworthy than an event in the 1980’s.
I’m not sure if you really think you’re going to convince people here of the historical reliability of the New Testament with the generalities and platitudes you’re serving up. I don’t know if you thought you could come here and show a bunch of secular scholars how to properly assess history. They have developed rigourous methods of determing the probablity of an historical event happening, and it has nothing to do with how many people believe it, or how long it’s been in print.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)