water said:
*************
M*W: As long as people are filled with LIES, they won't see the truth! Anger comes from being lied to, not the other way around.
Let's cut through the chase: Jesus didn't exist.
- Thread starter Medicine*Woman
- Start date
*************
M*W: As long as people are filled with LIES, they won't see the truth! Anger comes from being lied to, not the other way around.
geistkiesel said:
*************
M*W: Thanks, Geistkiesel, for your input. I have read this as well. I've always been interested in J kissing MM "on the mouth." That would imply existence. However, I believe it to be metaphorical as "life-giving breath" or something of that nature sort of like spiritual CPR. There are references in Genesis about God breathing life (the spirit) into Adam (again, metaphorical). I still doubt the existence of J, MM, and the 12 apostles. Had J lived, however, he would have been a simple rabbi but no dying demigod savior. MM is a much more believable character, but I'm convinced that all religion stems from astro-theology. There's only one religion, really, and it's called the zodiac. All religions evolved from stories about the constellations and other sky bodies. However, I'm not promoting it as a religion as some may think.
Even the names/titles in the bible have metaphorical meanings. Nothing is as it would seem. "As above, so below" says it all.
wayne_92587
Registered Senior Member
God did not kiss Adam, God Breathed the Nature, Way, Spirit, that is God, that Rains,
that makes the World go around, into Man Nostrils, and the Spirit of God, the Single True Nature of the Universe became manifest a Living Soul, Being, the Nature, the Way, the single True Nature, Spiritual Nature of the Universe alive in the Flesh of Mankind, he and she.
Adam and Eve are a Single Human Being, Adam being born of the dust of the ground while Eve is not born of the dust of the ground, Eve is a creation born of the side of Adam, Eve is Adam’s, Mankind's Second Nature, Way, Spirit, some say the better half..
The Materialistic Empirical Self, the Flesh Body and, the Immaterial, the Spiritual Self,
the Spiritual Body, the Rational Self, the One that thinks and therefore thinks that is knows that it is.
I am that I am
Boundlessness, Freedom, Rains.
that makes the World go around, into Man Nostrils, and the Spirit of God, the Single True Nature of the Universe became manifest a Living Soul, Being, the Nature, the Way, the single True Nature, Spiritual Nature of the Universe alive in the Flesh of Mankind, he and she.
Adam and Eve are a Single Human Being, Adam being born of the dust of the ground while Eve is not born of the dust of the ground, Eve is a creation born of the side of Adam, Eve is Adam’s, Mankind's Second Nature, Way, Spirit, some say the better half..
The Materialistic Empirical Self, the Flesh Body and, the Immaterial, the Spiritual Self,
the Spiritual Body, the Rational Self, the One that thinks and therefore thinks that is knows that it is.
I am that I am
Boundlessness, Freedom, Rains.
Sometimes kissing on the mouth is just kissing on the mouth. Even if the incident was fictional (not unlikely, seeing as we're talking about the non-canon Gospel of Philip, right?) it's a stretch, in my view, to impute symbolism into every action.Medicine Woman said:
Again, the fallacy here of making everything that isn't based on real events "symbolic" or "metaphorical". I don't think the author of Genesis (J in this case) thought of the breathing of God's Spirit into Adam as a metaphor for the spark of the divine which sets us apart from the common animals - I think (s)he thought Yahweh actually breathed into Adam.Medicine Woman said:
He was a simple rabbi. It was other people who made him into a demigod saviour, and none of it impinges on whether he was a real person.Medicine Woman said:
There's a difference between having a metaphorical meaning (the only one I know off the top of my head is Timothy, which is actually Timo-Thei or "fear God") and what you've so far considered evidential, nothing more than very rudimentary resemblance between certain names and various pagan deistic figures, that simply does not convince.Medicine Woman said:
This is sad, Medicine Woman. When Baigent and Leigh (currently wasting everybody's time in the high court with a completely spurious and publicity-motivated lawsuit against Dan Brown) wrote The Holy Blood and the Holy Grail, they publicised it with spurious claims to having the potential to destroy Christianity. It scarcely caused a ripple as far as Christianity's establishment is concerned, neither have I heard that it ever caused anyone to doubt their faith.MedicineWoman said:
This is not something we could ever get cast iron proof or disproof about without a time machine, so I'm pretty certain that Christianity is here to stay.
*************
M*W: A kiss may just be a kiss, and a smile is just a smile... but then there is symbolism which I believe the bible is rich in. Men kissed other men with "holy" kisses. What is a "holy kiss" anyway? Whether the events were real or symbolic, they meant something because they were written down. The writers, whomever they really were, wanted to make sure the readers knew what had taken place... yet, so much of what they wrote, explains nothing so we're left to guess.
*************
M*W: If he lived, yes, if he didn't exist, he was still a simple rabbi. I agree with your statement.
*************
M*W: Silas, there are many metaphorical meanings of names and places. For example, Joseph of Arimathea is an Anglicized name of (Joseph is an Egyptian title for something like 'mayor'), and Arimathea is a contracted name for 'Rama Theo.' Bartholomew is a contracted name/title for (Bar=Son) of Ptolemy. Barabbas means 'Son' of the 'Father'. Heli was Jesus' step-grandfather, or father of Joseph. Helios is the Sun. Lucifer comes from the Latin "lucien" to see; visible. However, the concept of Lucifer came from the Constellation Serpens which is stationed between the feet of Bootes (Adam) and Virgo (Eve). I believe the Planet Venus makes up part of these constellations, therefore, Lucifer has been called the "Morningstar." Yet, the sun is also a star of the morning. Humans only made-up stories about the constellations. They are real -- real constellations -- but not human beings. A woman "clothed in the sun" is symbolic of the Sun in Virgo. The whole bible is symbolic. Everything is left to the imagination!
*************
M*W: Baigent and Leigh aren't wasting anybody's time but Dan Brown's. I never supported his work of fiction. I did, however, research Holy Blood, Holy Grail against scholarly works. I'm afraid to tell you that it did, indeed, cause more than a ripple. Haven't you heard? Christianity is dying worldwide. This is what Christianity Today has published. Evangelists would want you to think it hasn't caused even a ripple, but they're either in denial or lying. I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree. The proverbial door is hitting Christianity in the ass even as we speak!
And my real first name has the derivation "man of the cliff" or "man on a cliff" and my surname is one of many that indicates "son of William". The names are evidence of a major Egyptian influence on the early CE jews. This is ethnologically interesting, but it is no rational basis for claiming the falsity of the entire Gospel story. Whether Jesus was made up as a mythological archetype does not change the evident fact that Judaeans were not infrequently called Joseph and Bar-something, and indeed Yeshua. Therefore you cannot use the names (being fairly common to ordinary people, not just Bible characters) as evidence for the astrologico-mythological basis for the Jesus story.
I wanted to raise this some time ago. All that "Serpens" stuff is just nonsense, it's a very minor constellation, that is not visible throughout the year, it is not an astrological constellation, nor is it even on the plane of the ecliptic. And I would have thought that if you are interested in Astrology and you are a reader of sciforums where Astronomy is discussed, you might have had a better idea of the stars to realise that neither Venus nor any planet is "part of" any constellation. The reason for this is that the planets move among the stars. That is in fact why they are called planets in the first place, planetes, from "wanderer". Lucifer is the "Morning Star", the "Light Bringer", no more no less, and Serpens need not apply.
A great deal of the Old Testament is "mythstory", which we can tell from inaccuracies in the stories regarding known historical facts (sometimes those historical facts can be found more accurately in other parts of the Bible!) For example, the book of Daniel, written probably later than any other part of the canonical Old Testament books, is very confused about the Babylonian kings supposed to have been reigning at the time of Daniel. This is not true of the Gospels, which get most of those details absolutely right - viz Herod the Great died not long before Jesus - which is obviously a minor contradiction, but it's not claiming that he was alive a century after he actually was. When we read in Luke 3:1
Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, Pontius Pilate being governor of Judaea, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee, and his brother Philip tetrarch of Ituraea and of the region of Trachonitis, and Lysanias the tetrarch of Abilene,
this is remarkably precise. This kind of exactitude is not the stuff of mythology, and however inaccurate in detail is an attempt at historical writing. It seems to me that nothing is "left to the imagination".First of all, you are claiming that Mary is the daughter of Heli, which is only a Christian apologetic to explain the difference in genealogies between two "infallible" Gospels. It does not say that Mary was the daughter of Heli. Also, I might add, that kind of "anything goes" mentality also represents a departure from the rational. I'm no more convinced of the supposed "symbolism" of every word of the New Testament than I am of the virgin birth or the Resurrection, and as a rational thinker, my view is you should not be either. But each to their own. And that includes devout Christian belivers.
wayne_92587
Registered Senior Member
Myth to included numerology, astrology all Religions are based on the same Reality.
If you can read between the lines, decode, interpret, speak in tongues you can see,
not all of but, much of the Reality in Myth.
The Dragon and the Snake is symbolic of the same Reality, also the Raven.
The low down duty snake in the grass has a split or forked tongue, the Raven
is a trickster.
Noah sent forth a raven, which went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from off the earth.
Myth from an old cowboy movie, White Man speak with forked tongue,
is two faced, a double dealer, talks out of both sides of his mouth, deals
from the bottom of the deck, is deceptive, a liar, duplicitous, guileful.
Most ancient languages use symbols, not words that have well defined meanings.
Even in of modern languages words having more than a single meaning are symbolic
in definition and must be interpreted, not translated.
Language is nothing more than Babel.
The other night there was a special on the TV about Noah and some of the guests on
the show were trying to interpret a passage in the Bible where it says that Noah created
the first Wine and ended up getting drunk and passing our in his tent.
It then said that Noah, “ 21 And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. 22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. 23 And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid [it] upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces [were] backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness.”
One of the speakers then interpreted this to mean that Ham seeing Noah’s nakedness sodomized Noah.
To show your nakedness simply means that you are shown not to be as perfect as some see you.
Shem and Japheth were blind, simply turns their head to Noah’s Nakedness, imperfections, drunkenness.
Adam born of the dust of the ground was born Naked, not fully clothed, imperfect, incomplete, not fully developed, without specification, Bare Ass Naked, Bare meaning less than a mere animal, pre, immature.
Mortal, animal Man is not physically fit to fight the battle for the survival of the fittest.
The first thing that Adam did when he became wise to his own nakedness was to run and hide.
Man’s, Adam’s, his and her, only salvation is to create a Second Nature that gives meaning to Life, the Freedom to survive.
Mortal Man must find Salvation from somewhere other than in his and her own Original Nature.
Adam and Eve are not man and woman although Adam born of the dust of the ground is a Material, physical reality, is masculine while Eve rather than being born of the dust of the ground, is created out of the side of Adam is Immaterial, Non-masculine, Feminine, Mercurial in Nature.
Eve born of the side of Adam, is Mankind’s Second Nature, some say his better half, is a Creation.
If you can read between the lines, decode, interpret, speak in tongues you can see,
not all of but, much of the Reality in Myth.
The Dragon and the Snake is symbolic of the same Reality, also the Raven.
The low down duty snake in the grass has a split or forked tongue, the Raven
is a trickster.
Noah sent forth a raven, which went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from off the earth.
Myth from an old cowboy movie, White Man speak with forked tongue,
is two faced, a double dealer, talks out of both sides of his mouth, deals
from the bottom of the deck, is deceptive, a liar, duplicitous, guileful.
Most ancient languages use symbols, not words that have well defined meanings.
Even in of modern languages words having more than a single meaning are symbolic
in definition and must be interpreted, not translated.
Language is nothing more than Babel.
The other night there was a special on the TV about Noah and some of the guests on
the show were trying to interpret a passage in the Bible where it says that Noah created
the first Wine and ended up getting drunk and passing our in his tent.
It then said that Noah, “ 21 And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent. 22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without. 23 And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid [it] upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces [were] backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness.”
One of the speakers then interpreted this to mean that Ham seeing Noah’s nakedness sodomized Noah.
To show your nakedness simply means that you are shown not to be as perfect as some see you.
Shem and Japheth were blind, simply turns their head to Noah’s Nakedness, imperfections, drunkenness.
Adam born of the dust of the ground was born Naked, not fully clothed, imperfect, incomplete, not fully developed, without specification, Bare Ass Naked, Bare meaning less than a mere animal, pre, immature.
Mortal, animal Man is not physically fit to fight the battle for the survival of the fittest.
The first thing that Adam did when he became wise to his own nakedness was to run and hide.
Man’s, Adam’s, his and her, only salvation is to create a Second Nature that gives meaning to Life, the Freedom to survive.
Mortal Man must find Salvation from somewhere other than in his and her own Original Nature.
Adam and Eve are not man and woman although Adam born of the dust of the ground is a Material, physical reality, is masculine while Eve rather than being born of the dust of the ground, is created out of the side of Adam is Immaterial, Non-masculine, Feminine, Mercurial in Nature.
Eve born of the side of Adam, is Mankind’s Second Nature, some say his better half, is a Creation.
Firstly let me offer my apologies. Having seen your statement that you weren't going to be around, I didn't bother responding or paying attention to this thread. Now seeings that you are in fact here, we might aswell continue if that's ok with you.
Of course, I would be able to acknowledge or rebutt this if I knew where the exact problem lied. While I apologise for making the statement in a light and yet humorous manner, I was hoping the point would still get across without it looking like any kind of straw man. I guess it disn't.
Can we even attest to a Peter and James? What you're actually doing is saying that Frodo clearly had a profound effect upon Gandalf and Aragorn that obviously Frodo existed. I don't personally consider that much of an argument as it stands.
What I did, was use the "walking on water" event, (although feel free to use any miracle event), to ask why you accept witness testimony that there was a Jesus, but then go on to dismiss that very same testimony when they mention miracles.
You have said it a couple of times now, but to use your earliest statement:
"I don't think I'm going out on a limb here to state that when the Bible claims Jesus was the result of a virgin birth, that he possessed power to change water into wine, walk on water, heal the sick, raise the dead and come back from the dead himself, it is (to be charitable) mistaken"
So.. The question is, and yes it is a question - not some "sad" statement in attempt to debunk anything: Why do you go so far as to demand that people consider witness testimony as accurate and honest until it comes to anything they say that sounds even remotely "supernatural" and then you ignore those very same witnesses?
Are they credible or not? If you say yes then surely that includes their claims concerning the alleged miracles. I see no valid reason for you to be able to accept or reject witness testimony whenever it so suits you - especially when they are the very same witnesses.
Strange, you did a few pages back, (see above quote).
I think we need to come to some kind of agreement here. What exactly are we agreeing and disagreeing with? Are we keeping it at it's absolute basic - in which case I have already agreed. Yes, there probably was a Jesus or 50. Shall we move on from there and say there was a Jesus born of a virgin, did miracles etc etc? Now we start wandering into another territory. So where exactly do we draw the line, and where exactly do we change a story about a "real" character into a story using a template of a man that might have existed that is in actuality entirely fictional?
It didn't finish in the tomb. Indeed Jesus came back to life and walked around a bit before witnesses saw him ascend into the sky doing the old terminator's: "I'll be back". Guess at least they understood that sequels are never as popular as the first.
Not at all, not once, not ever. He is a character that a writer or two have said has said things - and they couldn't even agree on what he said exactly.
Or perhaps, like me, people accord him the privilege of being a fictional character because there is absolutely no evidence to say he was ever anything but a fictional character.
But it doesn't. A minute ago you were mentioning accidents. It's unlikely Paul was writing something on the basis of changing all humanity - that was an accident as you rightly said, and as such there is nothing to suggest this isn't a complete work of fiction from some guy that had the ability to write in a time when not that many did. Motives are many - money, wealth and fame.. which to this day remain at the top of the list. Create a character, advertise and sell that character and you're a rich man. And hell, people write no matter what the consequences. I am currently writing something that would undoubtedly get me shot if it were ever published. I can name you quite a few writers and authors that have had to go into hiding after writing very provocative works - but that is what a writer does - that indeed is the very point of writing... I, and they, would take that chance. I'm sure even you right now could think of at least one author that went into hiding because he wrote something that would undoubtedly piss many people off.
A rabbi son of a jewish god that gets killed by the jews and ends up being against the jews? Oh it's a scandal of such epic proportions the guy deserves several key awards - of that there is no doubt. It is truly a political marvel and then some - but that doesn't make it real. This Jesus character could have, (and most likely did), resemble someone or some real people, (as I explained, characters usually do.. my latest character is a template of a man I saw on a train).. but that does not make Jesus real.
This Paul person wasn't looking to change the world, much like Shakespeare, (or perhaps Bacon - or whoever really wrote those highly political stories), wasn't aiming to be the highest selling author several hundred years after his death - but when it comes to writing, so much of it is political, and so much of it leads to somewhere you probably wouldn't want to be - but that is the price or immortality. My wife and others often bring up the subject of death and how to leave their mark. There are several ways, but I narrow it down to two.
The first is to have a zillion children. Donate to sperm banks, go out and bonk every woman in sight. At least in this way your genes carry on. However, in a few years you're forgotten forever.
The second, and more viable method, is to write something extremely provocative and political. They will be talking about you in 1000 years time. Shakespeare understood that, and so it would seem, did Paul.
Make the jews the enemy of their very own god. It's classic. It also doesn't in any way promote existence of the main character.
Speak to you soon,
Of course, I would be able to acknowledge or rebutt this if I knew where the exact problem lied. While I apologise for making the statement in a light and yet humorous manner, I was hoping the point would still get across without it looking like any kind of straw man. I guess it disn't.
Can we even attest to a Peter and James? What you're actually doing is saying that Frodo clearly had a profound effect upon Gandalf and Aragorn that obviously Frodo existed. I don't personally consider that much of an argument as it stands.
What I did, was use the "walking on water" event, (although feel free to use any miracle event), to ask why you accept witness testimony that there was a Jesus, but then go on to dismiss that very same testimony when they mention miracles.
You have said it a couple of times now, but to use your earliest statement:
"I don't think I'm going out on a limb here to state that when the Bible claims Jesus was the result of a virgin birth, that he possessed power to change water into wine, walk on water, heal the sick, raise the dead and come back from the dead himself, it is (to be charitable) mistaken"
So.. The question is, and yes it is a question - not some "sad" statement in attempt to debunk anything: Why do you go so far as to demand that people consider witness testimony as accurate and honest until it comes to anything they say that sounds even remotely "supernatural" and then you ignore those very same witnesses?
Are they credible or not? If you say yes then surely that includes their claims concerning the alleged miracles. I see no valid reason for you to be able to accept or reject witness testimony whenever it so suits you - especially when they are the very same witnesses.
Strange, you did a few pages back, (see above quote).
I think we need to come to some kind of agreement here. What exactly are we agreeing and disagreeing with? Are we keeping it at it's absolute basic - in which case I have already agreed. Yes, there probably was a Jesus or 50. Shall we move on from there and say there was a Jesus born of a virgin, did miracles etc etc? Now we start wandering into another territory. So where exactly do we draw the line, and where exactly do we change a story about a "real" character into a story using a template of a man that might have existed that is in actuality entirely fictional?
It didn't finish in the tomb. Indeed Jesus came back to life and walked around a bit before witnesses saw him ascend into the sky doing the old terminator's: "I'll be back". Guess at least they understood that sequels are never as popular as the first.
Not at all, not once, not ever. He is a character that a writer or two have said has said things - and they couldn't even agree on what he said exactly.
Or perhaps, like me, people accord him the privilege of being a fictional character because there is absolutely no evidence to say he was ever anything but a fictional character.
But it doesn't. A minute ago you were mentioning accidents. It's unlikely Paul was writing something on the basis of changing all humanity - that was an accident as you rightly said, and as such there is nothing to suggest this isn't a complete work of fiction from some guy that had the ability to write in a time when not that many did. Motives are many - money, wealth and fame.. which to this day remain at the top of the list. Create a character, advertise and sell that character and you're a rich man. And hell, people write no matter what the consequences. I am currently writing something that would undoubtedly get me shot if it were ever published. I can name you quite a few writers and authors that have had to go into hiding after writing very provocative works - but that is what a writer does - that indeed is the very point of writing... I, and they, would take that chance. I'm sure even you right now could think of at least one author that went into hiding because he wrote something that would undoubtedly piss many people off.
A rabbi son of a jewish god that gets killed by the jews and ends up being against the jews? Oh it's a scandal of such epic proportions the guy deserves several key awards - of that there is no doubt. It is truly a political marvel and then some - but that doesn't make it real. This Jesus character could have, (and most likely did), resemble someone or some real people, (as I explained, characters usually do.. my latest character is a template of a man I saw on a train).. but that does not make Jesus real.
This Paul person wasn't looking to change the world, much like Shakespeare, (or perhaps Bacon - or whoever really wrote those highly political stories), wasn't aiming to be the highest selling author several hundred years after his death - but when it comes to writing, so much of it is political, and so much of it leads to somewhere you probably wouldn't want to be - but that is the price or immortality. My wife and others often bring up the subject of death and how to leave their mark. There are several ways, but I narrow it down to two.
The first is to have a zillion children. Donate to sperm banks, go out and bonk every woman in sight. At least in this way your genes carry on. However, in a few years you're forgotten forever.
The second, and more viable method, is to write something extremely provocative and political. They will be talking about you in 1000 years time. Shakespeare understood that, and so it would seem, did Paul.
Make the jews the enemy of their very own god. It's classic. It also doesn't in any way promote existence of the main character.
Speak to you soon,
First you have to justify your total identification of the Jesus mythos as you would have it, with modern fiction as we know it today. Fiction simply was not written in those terms at that time.SnakeLord said:
I know I have this terrible difficulty - I write literally, not metaphorically, and I unjustifiably expect to be read precisely in accordance with what I write. Let me try again.
"When the Bible claims Jesus was"
- "the result of a virgin birth." Let's extract this one from the start - even witnesses to Jesus's ministry cannot expect to have been witnesses to Mary's confirmed continued virginity. This is just hearsay, so let's just dispose of it.
- "that he possessed power to change water into wine, walk on water, heal the sick, raise the dead and come back from the dead himself"
I simply reject the notion that accepting some testimony as valid and rejecting other testimony as being definitively impossible is in any way an irrational thing to do. As far as you are concerned, the Bible says, "he was born of a Virgin", which is obvioulsy impossible, so you throw out everything else that the books say about him. How are you going to learn anything that way? In actual fact, notwithstanding my misunderstood post from before, "ignoring" anything that sounds "even remotely supernatural" is not what I have done. Healing the sick is not remotely supernatural, and neither is coming back to life ... if you know how it's done. I'm happy to dismiss virgin births, as I'm sure you are. I'm just not sure why a miraculous conception narrative of someone who was being worshipped as a God automatically labels the entire book and the person it is written about as "Fiction".
Why go on about 50 other Jesuses? There is sufficient agreement amongst all four Gospels for us to be quite specific about one man named Jesus. If you are saying, "Yes, there was a Jesus, so what?" then, you're right, of course, we are arguing about nothing. The title of the thread is a bald statement of fact, and I think that arguments supporting it have lacked conviction or any reasonable basis. You've gone on in the argument to specifically equate the Jesus of the Gospels with Frodo Baggins and other such patently fictional characters. If your basic position is "Well, sure, there was a guy, I just don't believe he was the Son of God or healed the sick or changed water into wine," then we are in agreement, and we are both in disagreement with the topic title.
I don't conclude the story is "entirely" fictional simply because it is littered with fictional elements. Try reading Jordan's autobiography and determine which is truth and which is fictional. But does Jordan exist, and do the people in the book exist? I've only been arguing about the definitive statement "Jesus didn't exist". I'm not leaning on any desire not to have any illusions shattered, I find that the provenance for the documentation of his life is actually a great deal better than for any other historical figures of the same era. The histories of Tacitus, for example, do not exist in anything older than an 11th Century manuscript! If Tacitus is to be read as reliable history, then the Gospel of Luke has at least equal claim.
I'm afraid I'm not actually aware of any fictional characters of whom things have been written by different people, and not only have stories been told by those different people, but those stories differed in some details and not others. No, I'm afraid those are only characteristics of things written about real people, not fictional ones.
"Everything is completely fictional until proved otherwise" is not a theory I have much sympathy with. Your characterisation that there is "no evidence" for Jesus seems to me to show that you don't really understand what constitutes valid historical basis for any historical figure prior to, well, the 6th Century or so. If your claim is that without an actual contemporaneous document, we cannot attest his life at all, then thousands of Roman and Greek citizens (some of them extremely noteworthy) perish at the stroke of a pen! The whole of Greek civilisation, Aristotle, Socrates, Plato, Euclid - they all disappear into a confetti of tiny fragments.
There is a clear qualitative difference between some A.N.Other you saw on a train and decided to create a fictional character on, and a specific named, dated and origined person whom many people evidently thought was so good and wise that he must be a God. Fie with your "some guy named Jesus", it's nonsensical and unworthy of you.
wayne_92587
Registered Senior Member
You have to read between the line to interpret, find the Reality, the literal
Truth in Myth.
The Litteral True is that the, a, Christ is born of Woman and not of Man.
A Bastard Child has no Father, the Father is Nameless.
Buddha was a Bastard Child and it was later rumored that he had no Earthly Farther, that his Father was a God like Figure.
The Christ will not be born of Man, Masculinity.
The Christ will not have the Nature of a Masculine Father.
A Son carries the Nature of the Father.
The Existence of Jesus is unimportant because Jesus was not the Christ.
A Christ does not have the Nature of a Earthly Father, A Man born of
the dust of the ground, Masculinity, Brawniness.
The Christ, Adam was the Christ, Noah, was the Christ, the Christ is a Human Being, A Man, he and she, Mankind that is more than a mere Animal.
What makes a Humane Being more than a mere Animal?
Having had the Breath, the Nature, the Single True Nature, Spirit of the Universe, of God Breathed into Man’s, Mankind’s, his and her, nostrils.
The Spirit of God made manifest a living Soul, Man’s Immortal Soul, Being.
All of Mankind that become a Humane Being are the Sons and Daughters of
God, Are Christs.
The, A, Christ, the Sons and Daughters of God are embodied with the Spirit of God, are no longer bound to his and her original, Material Nature, the Animal nature of the Flesh Body.
The Christ is simply a Rational Humane Being.
Some need a little boost to find any joy in life such as wine.
Those that are embodied by the Single True Nature of the Universe, which has no mechanical where withal, is not Brawny, Macho, in Nature is able to find a Greater joy in life than can the Wino.
So how did Jesus the Christ turn water into wine if he existed?
It was the Spirit of Joy of the Christ that brought joy to the hearts of those at the party, even though they had no wine to drink, only had water to drink.
Truth in Myth.
The Litteral True is that the, a, Christ is born of Woman and not of Man.
A Bastard Child has no Father, the Father is Nameless.
Buddha was a Bastard Child and it was later rumored that he had no Earthly Farther, that his Father was a God like Figure.
The Christ will not be born of Man, Masculinity.
The Christ will not have the Nature of a Masculine Father.
A Son carries the Nature of the Father.
The Existence of Jesus is unimportant because Jesus was not the Christ.
A Christ does not have the Nature of a Earthly Father, A Man born of
the dust of the ground, Masculinity, Brawniness.
The Christ, Adam was the Christ, Noah, was the Christ, the Christ is a Human Being, A Man, he and she, Mankind that is more than a mere Animal.
What makes a Humane Being more than a mere Animal?
Having had the Breath, the Nature, the Single True Nature, Spirit of the Universe, of God Breathed into Man’s, Mankind’s, his and her, nostrils.
The Spirit of God made manifest a living Soul, Man’s Immortal Soul, Being.
All of Mankind that become a Humane Being are the Sons and Daughters of
God, Are Christs.
The, A, Christ, the Sons and Daughters of God are embodied with the Spirit of God, are no longer bound to his and her original, Material Nature, the Animal nature of the Flesh Body.
The Christ is simply a Rational Humane Being.
Some need a little boost to find any joy in life such as wine.
Those that are embodied by the Single True Nature of the Universe, which has no mechanical where withal, is not Brawny, Macho, in Nature is able to find a Greater joy in life than can the Wino.
So how did Jesus the Christ turn water into wine if he existed?
It was the Spirit of Joy of the Christ that brought joy to the hearts of those at the party, even though they had no wine to drink, only had water to drink.
wayne_92587 said:
*************
M*W: Seriously, wayne, what kind of drugs are you on?
That's not drug rant, that's wisdom. Although true or not; it is profound philosophy. 
The Jesus Myth is a myth started by revisionists based on their own prejudice and anti-christian agenda, contrary to an abundance of evidence that shows otherwise. Does any serious historian question that a man named Jesus that was crucified didn't exist to start with? Who?
What Modern History Scholars Have to Say
Howard Marshall
In his book, I Believe in the Historical Jesus, Howard Marshall points out that in the early to mid 20th century, one of the few "authorities" to consider Jesus as a myth was a Soviet Encyclopaedia. He then goes on to discuss the work of GA Wells which was then recently published.
There is said to be a Russian encyclopaedia in current use which affirms in a brief entry that Jesus Christ was the mythological founder of Christianity, but it is virtually alone in doing so. The historian will not take its statement very seriously, since ... it offers no evidence for its assertion, and mere assertion cannot stand over against historical enquiry. But more than mere assertion is involved, for an attempt to show that Jesus never existed has been made in recent years by GA Wells, a Professor of German who has ventured into New Testament study and presents a case that the origins Christianity can be explained without assuming that Jesus really lived. Earlier presentations of similar views at the turn of the century failed to make any impression on scholarly opinion, and it is certain that this latest presentation of the case will not fare any better.
Professor Marshall was correct that neither any earlier attempt nor Wells have swayed scholarly opinion. This remains true whether the scholars were Christians, liberals, conservatives, Jewish, atheist, agnostic, or Catholic. And even GA Wells himself has now conceded that a real figure called Jesus lay behind some of the teaching contained in the synoptic Gospels.
Michael Grant
In his book Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels, Atheist historian Michael Grant completely rejected the idea that Jesus never existed.
This sceptical way of thinking reached its culmination in the argument that Jesus as a human being never existed at all and is a myth.... But above all, if we apply to the New Testament, as we should, the same sort of criteria as we should apply to other ancient writings containing historical material, we can no more reject Jesus' existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned. Certainly, there are all those discrepancies between one Gospel and another. But we do not deny that an event ever took place just because some pagan historians such as, for example, Livy and Polybius, happen to have described it in differing terms.... To sum up, modern critical methods fail to support the Christ myth theory. It has 'again and again been answered and annihilated by first rank scholars.' In recent years, 'no serous scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary.
Will Durant
Secular scholar Will Durant, who left the Catholic Church and embraced humanism, also dismisses the idea in Caesar and Christ (the third volume of his Story of Civilisation), the
The Christian evidence for Christ begins with the letters ascribed to Saint Paul. Some of these are of uncertain authorship; several, antedating A.D. 64, are almost universally accounted as substantially genuine. No one has questioned the existence of Paul, or his repeated meetings with Peter, James, and John; and Paul enviously admits that these men had known Christ in his flesh. The accepted epistles frequently refer to the Last Supper and the Crucifixion.... The contradictions are of minutiae, not substance; in essentials the synoptic gospels agree remarkably well, and form a consistent portrait of Christ. In the enthusiasm of its discoveries the Higher Criticism has applied to the New Testament tests of authenticity so severe that by them a hundred ancient worthies, for example Hammurabi, David, Socrates would fade into legend. Despite the prejudices and theological preconceptions of the evangelists, they record many incidents that mere inventors would have concealed the competition of the apostles for high places in the Kingdom, their flight after Jesus' arrest, Peter's denial, the failure of Christ to work miracles in Galilee, the references of some auditors to his possible insanity, his early uncertainty as to his mission, his confessions of ignorance as to the future, his moments of bitterness, his despairing cry on the cross; no one reading these scenes can doubt the reality of the figure behind them. That a few simple men should in one generation have invented so powerful and appealing a personality, so loft an ethic and so inspiring a vision of human brotherhood, would be a miracle far more incredible than any recorded in the Gospel. After two centuries of Higher Criticism the outlines of the life, character, and teaching of Christ, remain reasonably clear, and constitute the most fascinating feature of the history of Western man.
Rudolf Bultmann
Even the famously liberal Professor Bultmann, who argued against the historicity of much of the gospels, questions the reasonableness of Jesus Mythers themselves in Jesus and the Word.
Of course the doubt as to whether Jesus really existed is unfounded and not worth refutation. No sane person can doubt that Jesus stands as founder behind the historical movement whose first distinct stage is represented by the Palestinian community.
Robert Van Voorst
It is also obvious that the diverse and all but completely unanimous opinion of modern Jesus scholars and relevant historians remain completely unconvinced by the Jesus Myth arguments. Robert Van Voosrt writes in Jesus Outside the New Testament:
Contemporary New Testament scholars have typically viewed their arguments as so weak or bizarre that they relegate them to footnotes, or often ignore them completely.... The theory of Jesus' nonexistence is now effectively dead as a scholarly question.
Graham Stanton
Professor Stanton occupies the chair in New Testament Studies at Cambridge University and led the attack on Carston Theide's re-dating of the Jesus Papyrus. He considers the Jesus Myth crowd even more extreme as he writes in The Gospels and Jesus.
Today, nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed and that the gospels contain plenty of valuable evidence which as to be weighed and assessed critically. There is general agreement that, with the possible exception of Paul, we know far more about Jesus of Nazareth than about any first or second century Jewish or pagan religious teacher.
Given the broad consensus against the Jesus Myth, it has been left to a few non-professional commentators, such as Earl Doherty and GA Wells to question Jesus' existence. Despite their vigorous efforts, they have failed, and continue to fail, to even give their position respectability in the broader academic community.
Richard Carrier
It remains for each reader to determine what weight to give such a broad consensus of experts from such diverse perspectives. However, amateurs to the field of history generally and New Testament history in particular should consider the comments of Richard Carrier, co-founder of the Secular Web, made on their discussion board:
Amateurs often disregard the crucial importance of field-familiarity, i.e. that one must have a long and deep acquaintance with a particular time and culture in order to make reliable judgments about the probable and improbable, the expected and unexpected, and all the other background assumptions necessary to understanding the significance of any particular fact or claim--in short, one must be cognizant not merely of the literary context of a statement, but its entire socio-historical context as well. And that is no easy thing to achieve.
Secular Historians that wrote about Jesus
JOSEPHUS: (37-101 A.D.)
Josephus was born in Jerusalem only four years after Jesus' crucifixion. He was an eyewitness to much of what he recorded in the first century A.D. Josephus mentions many events and people from the Gospels. Josephus was an Orthodox Jew who was commissioned by the Romans to write a history of the Jewish people and Rome up until that point.
Mentions Jesus: Antiquities, Book 18, ch. 3, par. 3.
Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
Mentions John the Baptist and Herod: Antiquities, Book 18, ch. 5, par. 2
"Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness."
Mentions James, the half-brother of Jesus: Antiquities, Book 20, ch. 19.
"Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done."
TACITUS: (55-117 A.D.)
Cornelius Tactitus is regarded as the greatest historian of ancient Rome. Writing on the reign of Nero, Tacitus alludes to the death of Christ and to the existence of Christians in Rome.
"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular."
PLINY THE YOUNGER: (112 A.D.)
Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor, Pliny wrote a letter to the Emperor Trajan regarding how to deal with Christians who worship Christ. These letters concern an episode which marks the first time the Roman government recognized Christianity as a religion separate from Judaism, and sets a precedent for the massive persecution of Christians that takes place in the second and third centuries.
"They (the Christians) were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food—but food of an ordinary and innocent kind."
BABYLONIAN TALMUD: (Completed in the 6th Century A.D.)
The Babylonian Talmud is a Rabbinic commentary on the Jewish scriptures (Tanach: Old Testament). They are a look into what a hostile source was saying about Jesus. They couldn't deny his miracles so they claim that it was sorcery rather than admit to what was a known fact. They also admit that Yeshu (Hebrew for Jesus) was hanged (Crucified: Luke 23:39, Galatians 3:13).
"On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery (an admission of his miracles) and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can say anything in his favor, let him come forward and plead on his behalf." But since nothing was brought forward in his favor he was hanged on the eve of the Passover!"
The Babylonian Talmud, vol. III, Sanhedrin 43a.
LUCIAN: (120-180 A.D.)
A Greek satirist that spoke scornfully of Christ and Christians, affirming that they were real and historical people, never saying that they were fictional characters.
"The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day—the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account....You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property."
Lucian, The Death of Peregrine. 11-13.
LETTER OF MARA BARSARAPION: (73 A.D.)
Mara Bar-Serapion was a Syrian who lived in the first century A.D. He wrote a letter to his son Serapion that mentions the Jews who killed their King. The letter is now in the possession of the British Museum.
"What benefit did the Athenians obtain by putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as judgment for their crime. Or, the people of Samos for burning Pythagoras? In one moment their country was covered with sand. Or the Jews by murdering their wise king?...After that their kingdom was abolished. God rightly avenged these men...The wise king...Lived on in the teachings he enacted."
Thallus: (52 A.D.)
One of the first secular writers that mentioned Christ. Thallus wrote a history of the Eastern Mediterranean world from the Trojan War to his own time. Unfortunately, his writings are only found as citations by others. Julius Africanus, a Christian who wrote about AD 221 mentioned Thallus' account of an eclipse of the sun (Luke 23:44-45).
"On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun."
Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18:1.
PHLEGON: (1st Century)
A secular historian wrote a history named, "Chronicles." This original work has been lost, Julius Africanus preserved a small fragment in his writings. Phlegon mentions the eclipse (Matthew 27:45) during the crucifixion of Jesus.
"During the time of Tiberius Caesar an eclipse of the sun occurred during the full moon."
Africanus, Chronography, 18:1.
SUETONIUS: (69-140 A.D.)
A Roman historian and annalist of the Imperial House under the Emperor Hadrian. He refers to Christ and Christians and the "disturbances" caused by them, namely not worshipping idols and loving all, including their tormentors.
"Because the Jews at Rome caused constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus [Christ], he [Claudius] expelled them from the city [Rome]." Acts 18:2, which took place in 49 A.D.
Life of Claudius, 25:4.
In another work Suetonius wrote about the the fire which devastated Rome in 64 A.D. under the reign of Nero. Nero blamed the Christians and exacted a heavy punishment upon them, among them covering them with pitch and burning them alive in his gardens.
"Nero inflicted punishment on the Christians, a sect given to a new and mischievous religious belief."
Lives of the Caesars, 26.2
CELSUS: (2nd Century)
Criticizes the Gospels, unknowingly reinforces the authors and the content, he alludes to 80 different quotes in the Bible. Admits that the miracles of Jesus were generally believed in the 2nd century.
JULIAN THE APOSTATE: (332-363 A.D.)
Emperor of Rome mentions the Gospels, miracles and other facts about Jesus. Julian had struggled to end the power of Christians in the Roman Empire. Since the day fifty years earlier that Constantine conquered in the sign of the cross, Christian influence had steadily grown. As Julian lay dying from a mortal wound he made the following remark:
"As he bled, the dying emperor groaned, "You have conquered, O Galilean," referring to Jesus Christ.
CLEMENT OF ROME: (100 A.D.)
Clement affirms the Resurrection, Gospels and that Jesus was sent to earth by God to take away our sins.
"Clement was the fourth bishop of Rome, the first being Peter. Did he know Peter and Paul? It is completely possible that those two Spirit-filled men taught him. Clement even wrote a letter to the Corinthian church that echoed the teachings of the apostles."
Ignatius of Antioch: (50-107 A.D.)
Disciple of the apostles Peter, Paul, and John, who was martyred for his faith in Jesus. He was obviously convinced that Jesus really had lived and that Jesus was all that the apostles has said He was.
"...nearness to the sword is nearness to God; to be among the wild beasts is to be in the arms of God; only let it be in the name of Jesus Christ. I endure all things that I may suffer together with him, since he who became perfect man strengthens me...We have not only to be called Christians, but to be Christians."
While the emperor Trajan was on a visit to Asia Minor, he arrested Ignatius. When the bishop confessed his faith in Christ, the Emperor sent him in chains to Rome to die. He was hustled to the arena at once and thrown to two fierce lions who immediately devoured him.
QUADRATUS: (125 A.D.)
Bishop of Athens and a disciple of the apostles. Church historian Eusebius has preserved the only work that we have from Quadratus.
"The deeds of our Saviour were always before you, for they were true miracles; those that were healed, those that were raised from the dead, who were seen, not only when healed and when raised, but were always present. They remained living a long time, not only whilst our Lord was on earth, but likewise when he had left the earth. So that some of them have also lived in our times."
Eusebius, IV, III
EPISTLE OF BARNABAS: (130-38 A.D.)
Mentions the Resurrection, miracles, content of the Gospels and the crucifixion of Jesus.
ARISTIDES: (138-161 A.D.)
Aristides was a second-century Christian believer and philosopher from Athens. This portion of his defense of Christianity was addressed to the Roman Emperor Antonius Pius, who reigned from 138-161 A.D.
"The Son of the most high God, revealed by the Holy Spirit, descended from heaven, born of a Hebrew Virgin. His flesh he received from the Virgin, and he revealed himself in the human nature as the Son of God. In his goodness which brought the glad tidings, he has won the whole world by his life-giving preaching...He selected twelve apostles and taught the whole world by his mediatorial, light-giving truth. And he was crucified, being pierced with nails by the Jews; and he rose from the dead and ascended to heaven. He sent the apostles into all the world and instructed all by divine miracles full of wisdom. Their preaching bears blossoms and fruits to this day, and calls the whole world to illumination."
Carey, "Aristides," 68.
JUSTIN MARTYR: (106-167 A.D.)
Justin Martyr is regarded as one of the greatest early Christian apologists. He was born around 100 A.D and was beheaded for his faith in Jesus in 167 A.D. He mentions as facts many things about Jesus and Christianity, such as: The Magi (wise men who brought gifts from Arabia), King Herod, His crucifixion, His garments parted among the Roman soldiers, the apostles leaving him on the night of his arrest, his fulfilled prophecies, His resurrection and His ascending into heaven among many others. These quotes can be found in his debate with Trypho the Jew.
HEGESIPPUS: (2 Century)
Eusebius draws the conclusion that Hegesippus was a Jew that wrote five books called, "Memoirs." Only fragments remain of his original work in the writings of Eusebius. They show that Hegesippus traveled extensively trying to determine if the stories of Jesus and the apostles were true. He found that they they were accurate, even in the troubled church in Corinth.
"The Corinthian church continued in the true doctrine until Primus became bishop. I mixed with them on my voyage to Rome and spent several days with the Corinthians, during which we were refreshed with the true doctrine. On arrival at Rome I pieced together the succession down to Anicetus, whose deacon was Eleutherus, Anicetus being succeeded by Soter and he by Eleutherus. In every line of bishops and in every city things accord with the preaching of the Law, the Prophets, and the Lord."
Eusebius, The History of the Church, 9.22.2.
TRAJAN: (53-117 A.D.)
Trajan is a Roman Emperor who wrote a letter [see letter] in response to the Governor of Asia Minor, Pliny the Younger. Pliny needed advice in dealing with "Christians" who renounced their belief in Jesus due to fear of torture and execution.
MACROBIUS: (4th-5th Century)
Pascal (Pensees) mentions a quote of Augustus Caesar as an evidence to the murder of the 7-20 male babies (this is based on the population of Bethlehem in 4-6 B.C., which was 700-1,000 people) by King Herod in Bethlehem (Matthew 2:16).
King Herod heard that a king was to be born and his fear and mental instability caused him to kill these male children under two years of age. King Herod killed his Wife, mother in law, and three sons. This is in character with his life of murder and paranoia. King Herod's reign was described by his enemies as, "He stole to the throne like a fox, ruled like a tiger, and died like a dog."
Saturnalia, lib. 2, ch.4.
HADRIAN: (106-167 A.D.)
Justin Martyr quotes this Roman Emperor's letter to Minucius Fundanus, proconsul of Asia Minor. This letter deals with accusations from pagans against the Christians.
"I have received the letter addressed to me by your predecessor Serenius Granianus, a most illustrious man; and this communication I am unwilling to pass over in silence, lest innocent persons be disturbed, and occasion be given to the informers for practicing villainy. Accordingly, if the inhabitants of your province will so far sustain this petition of theirs as to accuse the Christians in some court of law, I do not prohibit them from doing so. But I will not suffer them to make use of mere entreaties and outcries. For it is far more just, if any one desires to make an accusation, that you give judgment upon it. If, therefore, any one makes the accusation, and furnishes proof that the said men do anything contrary to the laws, you shall adjudge punishments in proportion to the offences. And this, by Hercules; you shall give special heed to, that if any man shall, through mere calumny, bring an accusation against any of these persons, you shall award to him more severe punishments in proportion to his wickedness."
Justin Martyr, The First Apology, Chapters, 68-69.
JUVENAL: (55 AD-127 AD)
Juvenal makes a reference of the tortures of Christians by Nero in Rome.
"But just describe Tigellinus and you will blaze amid those faggots in which men, with their throats tightly gripped, stand and burn and smoke, and you trace a broad furrow through the middle of the arena."
Satires, 1, lines 147-157.
SENECA: (3 B.C.-65 A.D.)
Seneca mentions the cruelties that Nero imposes upon Christians.
"The other kind of evil comes, so to speak, in the form of a huge parade. Surrounding it is a retinue of swords and fire and chains and a mob of beasts to be let loose upon the disemboweled entrails of men. Picture to yourself under his head the prison, the cross, the rack, the hook, and the stake which they drive straight through a man until it protrudes from his throat. Think of human limbs torn apart by chariots driven in opposite directions, of the terrible shirt smeared and interwoven with inflammable materials, and of all the other contrivances devised by cruelty, in addition to those which I have mentioned!"
Epistulae Morales, Epistle 14, "On the Reasons for Withdrawing from the World."
HIEROCLES: (AD 284-305)
A quote by Eusebius preserves some of the text of this lost work of Hierocles, Philalethes or Lover of Truth. In this quote, Hierocles condemns Peter and Paul as sorcerers. Again, their miracles could not be denied, rather they claimed that they used sorcery.
"And this point is also worth noticing, that whereas the tales of Jesus have been vamped up by Peter and Paul and a few others of the kind,--men who were liars and devoid of education and wizards."
Eusebius, The Treatise of Eusebius, ch. 2.
ANTONIUS PIUS: (86 AD to 161 AD)
A letter from the Roman Emperor Antoninus Pius to the general assembly in Asia Minor. This letter says that the officials in Aisa Minor were getting upset at the Christians in their province, and that no changes are to be made in Antoninus' method of dealing with them.
"The Emperor Caesar Titus AElius Adrianus Antoninus Augustus Pius, Supreme Pontiff, in the fifteenth year of his tribuneship, Consul for the third time, Father of the fatherland, to the Common Assembly of Asia, greeting: I should have thought that the gods themselves would see to it that such offenders should not escape. For if they had the power, they themselves would much rather punish those who refuse to worship them; but it is you who bring trouble on these persons, and accuse as the opinion of atheists that which they hold, and lay to their charge certain other things which we are unable to prove. But it would be advantageous to them that they should be thought to die for that of which they are accused, and they conquer you by being lavish of their lives rather than yield that obedience which you require of them. And regarding the earthquakes which have already happened and are now occurring, it is not seemly that you remind us of them, losing heart whenever they occur, and thus set your conduct in contrast with that of these men; for they have much greater confidence towards God than you yourselves have. And you, indeed, seem at such times to ignore the gods, and you neglect the temples, and make no recognition of the worship of God. And hence you are jealous of those who do serve Him, and persecute them to the death. Concerning such persons, some others also of the governors of provinces wrote to my most divine father; to whom he replied that they should not at all disturb such persons, unless they were found to be attempting anything against the Roman government. And to myself many have sent intimations regarding such persons, to whom I also replied in pursuance of my father's judgment. But if any one has a matter to bring against any person of this class, merely as such a person, let the accused be acquitted of the charge, even though he should be found to be such an one; but let the accuser he amenable to justice."
Justin Martyr, The First Apology, ch. 70.
Ancient Secular Writings about Jesus
Cornelius Tacitus (born A.D. 52-54) - A Roman historian, in A.D. 112, Governor of Asia, son in law of Julius Agricola, who was Governor of Britain A.D. 80-84. Writting of the reign of Nero, Tacitus alludes to the death of Christ and to the existence of Christians in Rome:
"But not all the relief that could come from man....availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished with the most exquisite of tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius...."
Tacitus has a further reference to Christianity in a fragment of his "Histories", dealing with the burning of Jerusalem Temple in A.D. 70, preserved by Sulpicius Severus.
Lucian of Samosata - A satirist of the second century, who spoke scornfully of Christ and the Christians. He connected them with the synagogues of Palestine and alluded to Christ as:
"the man who was crucified in Palestine because He introduced this new cult into the world....Furthermore, their first lawgiver persuaded them that they were all brothers one of another after they have transgressed once for all by denying the Greek gods and by worshipping that crucified sophist Himself and living under His Laws." Lucian also mentions the Christians several times in other writings.
Flavius Josephus (born A.D. 37) - A Jewish historian, became a Pharisee at age 19; in A.D.66 he was the commander of the Jewish forces in Galilee. After being captured, he was attached to the Roman headquarters. He says in a hotly contested quotation:
"Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call Him a man, for He was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to Him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ, and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned Him to the cross, those that loved Him at the first did not forsake Him; for He appeared to them alive again in the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning Him. And the tribe of Christians so named for Him are not extinct at this day."
The Arabic text of this passage is as follows:
"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." The above passage is found in a Arabic manuscript. Bishop Agapius in the tenth century writes: We have found in many books of the philosophers that they refer to the day of the crucifixion of Christ" We also find from Josephus a reference to James the brother of Jesus, in Antiquities XX 9:1.
What Modern History Scholars Have to Say
Howard Marshall
In his book, I Believe in the Historical Jesus, Howard Marshall points out that in the early to mid 20th century, one of the few "authorities" to consider Jesus as a myth was a Soviet Encyclopaedia. He then goes on to discuss the work of GA Wells which was then recently published.
There is said to be a Russian encyclopaedia in current use which affirms in a brief entry that Jesus Christ was the mythological founder of Christianity, but it is virtually alone in doing so. The historian will not take its statement very seriously, since ... it offers no evidence for its assertion, and mere assertion cannot stand over against historical enquiry. But more than mere assertion is involved, for an attempt to show that Jesus never existed has been made in recent years by GA Wells, a Professor of German who has ventured into New Testament study and presents a case that the origins Christianity can be explained without assuming that Jesus really lived. Earlier presentations of similar views at the turn of the century failed to make any impression on scholarly opinion, and it is certain that this latest presentation of the case will not fare any better.
Professor Marshall was correct that neither any earlier attempt nor Wells have swayed scholarly opinion. This remains true whether the scholars were Christians, liberals, conservatives, Jewish, atheist, agnostic, or Catholic. And even GA Wells himself has now conceded that a real figure called Jesus lay behind some of the teaching contained in the synoptic Gospels.
Michael Grant
In his book Jesus: An Historian's Review of the Gospels, Atheist historian Michael Grant completely rejected the idea that Jesus never existed.
This sceptical way of thinking reached its culmination in the argument that Jesus as a human being never existed at all and is a myth.... But above all, if we apply to the New Testament, as we should, the same sort of criteria as we should apply to other ancient writings containing historical material, we can no more reject Jesus' existence than we can reject the existence of a mass of pagan personages whose reality as historical figures is never questioned. Certainly, there are all those discrepancies between one Gospel and another. But we do not deny that an event ever took place just because some pagan historians such as, for example, Livy and Polybius, happen to have described it in differing terms.... To sum up, modern critical methods fail to support the Christ myth theory. It has 'again and again been answered and annihilated by first rank scholars.' In recent years, 'no serous scholar has ventured to postulate the non historicity of Jesus' or at any rate very few, and they have not succeeded in disposing of the much stronger, indeed very abundant, evidence to the contrary.
Will Durant
Secular scholar Will Durant, who left the Catholic Church and embraced humanism, also dismisses the idea in Caesar and Christ (the third volume of his Story of Civilisation), the
The Christian evidence for Christ begins with the letters ascribed to Saint Paul. Some of these are of uncertain authorship; several, antedating A.D. 64, are almost universally accounted as substantially genuine. No one has questioned the existence of Paul, or his repeated meetings with Peter, James, and John; and Paul enviously admits that these men had known Christ in his flesh. The accepted epistles frequently refer to the Last Supper and the Crucifixion.... The contradictions are of minutiae, not substance; in essentials the synoptic gospels agree remarkably well, and form a consistent portrait of Christ. In the enthusiasm of its discoveries the Higher Criticism has applied to the New Testament tests of authenticity so severe that by them a hundred ancient worthies, for example Hammurabi, David, Socrates would fade into legend. Despite the prejudices and theological preconceptions of the evangelists, they record many incidents that mere inventors would have concealed the competition of the apostles for high places in the Kingdom, their flight after Jesus' arrest, Peter's denial, the failure of Christ to work miracles in Galilee, the references of some auditors to his possible insanity, his early uncertainty as to his mission, his confessions of ignorance as to the future, his moments of bitterness, his despairing cry on the cross; no one reading these scenes can doubt the reality of the figure behind them. That a few simple men should in one generation have invented so powerful and appealing a personality, so loft an ethic and so inspiring a vision of human brotherhood, would be a miracle far more incredible than any recorded in the Gospel. After two centuries of Higher Criticism the outlines of the life, character, and teaching of Christ, remain reasonably clear, and constitute the most fascinating feature of the history of Western man.
Rudolf Bultmann
Even the famously liberal Professor Bultmann, who argued against the historicity of much of the gospels, questions the reasonableness of Jesus Mythers themselves in Jesus and the Word.
Of course the doubt as to whether Jesus really existed is unfounded and not worth refutation. No sane person can doubt that Jesus stands as founder behind the historical movement whose first distinct stage is represented by the Palestinian community.
Robert Van Voorst
It is also obvious that the diverse and all but completely unanimous opinion of modern Jesus scholars and relevant historians remain completely unconvinced by the Jesus Myth arguments. Robert Van Voosrt writes in Jesus Outside the New Testament:
Contemporary New Testament scholars have typically viewed their arguments as so weak or bizarre that they relegate them to footnotes, or often ignore them completely.... The theory of Jesus' nonexistence is now effectively dead as a scholarly question.
Graham Stanton
Professor Stanton occupies the chair in New Testament Studies at Cambridge University and led the attack on Carston Theide's re-dating of the Jesus Papyrus. He considers the Jesus Myth crowd even more extreme as he writes in The Gospels and Jesus.
Today, nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed and that the gospels contain plenty of valuable evidence which as to be weighed and assessed critically. There is general agreement that, with the possible exception of Paul, we know far more about Jesus of Nazareth than about any first or second century Jewish or pagan religious teacher.
Given the broad consensus against the Jesus Myth, it has been left to a few non-professional commentators, such as Earl Doherty and GA Wells to question Jesus' existence. Despite their vigorous efforts, they have failed, and continue to fail, to even give their position respectability in the broader academic community.
Richard Carrier
It remains for each reader to determine what weight to give such a broad consensus of experts from such diverse perspectives. However, amateurs to the field of history generally and New Testament history in particular should consider the comments of Richard Carrier, co-founder of the Secular Web, made on their discussion board:
Amateurs often disregard the crucial importance of field-familiarity, i.e. that one must have a long and deep acquaintance with a particular time and culture in order to make reliable judgments about the probable and improbable, the expected and unexpected, and all the other background assumptions necessary to understanding the significance of any particular fact or claim--in short, one must be cognizant not merely of the literary context of a statement, but its entire socio-historical context as well. And that is no easy thing to achieve.
Secular Historians that wrote about Jesus
JOSEPHUS: (37-101 A.D.)
Josephus was born in Jerusalem only four years after Jesus' crucifixion. He was an eyewitness to much of what he recorded in the first century A.D. Josephus mentions many events and people from the Gospels. Josephus was an Orthodox Jew who was commissioned by the Romans to write a history of the Jewish people and Rome up until that point.
Mentions Jesus: Antiquities, Book 18, ch. 3, par. 3.
Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.
Mentions John the Baptist and Herod: Antiquities, Book 18, ch. 5, par. 2
"Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man, and commanded the Jews to exercise virtue, both as to righteousness towards one another, and piety towards God, and so to come to baptism; for that the washing [with water] would be acceptable to him, if they made use of it, not in order to the putting away [or the remission] of some sins [only], but for the purification of the body; supposing still that the soul was thoroughly purified beforehand by righteousness."
Mentions James, the half-brother of Jesus: Antiquities, Book 20, ch. 19.
"Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done."
TACITUS: (55-117 A.D.)
Cornelius Tactitus is regarded as the greatest historian of ancient Rome. Writing on the reign of Nero, Tacitus alludes to the death of Christ and to the existence of Christians in Rome.
"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular."
PLINY THE YOUNGER: (112 A.D.)
Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor, Pliny wrote a letter to the Emperor Trajan regarding how to deal with Christians who worship Christ. These letters concern an episode which marks the first time the Roman government recognized Christianity as a religion separate from Judaism, and sets a precedent for the massive persecution of Christians that takes place in the second and third centuries.
"They (the Christians) were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food—but food of an ordinary and innocent kind."
BABYLONIAN TALMUD: (Completed in the 6th Century A.D.)
The Babylonian Talmud is a Rabbinic commentary on the Jewish scriptures (Tanach: Old Testament). They are a look into what a hostile source was saying about Jesus. They couldn't deny his miracles so they claim that it was sorcery rather than admit to what was a known fact. They also admit that Yeshu (Hebrew for Jesus) was hanged (Crucified: Luke 23:39, Galatians 3:13).
"On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery (an admission of his miracles) and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can say anything in his favor, let him come forward and plead on his behalf." But since nothing was brought forward in his favor he was hanged on the eve of the Passover!"
The Babylonian Talmud, vol. III, Sanhedrin 43a.
LUCIAN: (120-180 A.D.)
A Greek satirist that spoke scornfully of Christ and Christians, affirming that they were real and historical people, never saying that they were fictional characters.
"The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day—the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account....You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the contempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property."
Lucian, The Death of Peregrine. 11-13.
LETTER OF MARA BARSARAPION: (73 A.D.)
Mara Bar-Serapion was a Syrian who lived in the first century A.D. He wrote a letter to his son Serapion that mentions the Jews who killed their King. The letter is now in the possession of the British Museum.
"What benefit did the Athenians obtain by putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as judgment for their crime. Or, the people of Samos for burning Pythagoras? In one moment their country was covered with sand. Or the Jews by murdering their wise king?...After that their kingdom was abolished. God rightly avenged these men...The wise king...Lived on in the teachings he enacted."
Thallus: (52 A.D.)
One of the first secular writers that mentioned Christ. Thallus wrote a history of the Eastern Mediterranean world from the Trojan War to his own time. Unfortunately, his writings are only found as citations by others. Julius Africanus, a Christian who wrote about AD 221 mentioned Thallus' account of an eclipse of the sun (Luke 23:44-45).
"On the whole world there pressed a most fearful darkness; and the rocks were rent by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. This darkness Thallus, in the third book of his History, calls, as appears to me without reason, an eclipse of the sun."
Julius Africanus, Chronography, 18:1.
PHLEGON: (1st Century)
A secular historian wrote a history named, "Chronicles." This original work has been lost, Julius Africanus preserved a small fragment in his writings. Phlegon mentions the eclipse (Matthew 27:45) during the crucifixion of Jesus.
"During the time of Tiberius Caesar an eclipse of the sun occurred during the full moon."
Africanus, Chronography, 18:1.
SUETONIUS: (69-140 A.D.)
A Roman historian and annalist of the Imperial House under the Emperor Hadrian. He refers to Christ and Christians and the "disturbances" caused by them, namely not worshipping idols and loving all, including their tormentors.
"Because the Jews at Rome caused constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus [Christ], he [Claudius] expelled them from the city [Rome]." Acts 18:2, which took place in 49 A.D.
Life of Claudius, 25:4.
In another work Suetonius wrote about the the fire which devastated Rome in 64 A.D. under the reign of Nero. Nero blamed the Christians and exacted a heavy punishment upon them, among them covering them with pitch and burning them alive in his gardens.
"Nero inflicted punishment on the Christians, a sect given to a new and mischievous religious belief."
Lives of the Caesars, 26.2
CELSUS: (2nd Century)
Criticizes the Gospels, unknowingly reinforces the authors and the content, he alludes to 80 different quotes in the Bible. Admits that the miracles of Jesus were generally believed in the 2nd century.
JULIAN THE APOSTATE: (332-363 A.D.)
Emperor of Rome mentions the Gospels, miracles and other facts about Jesus. Julian had struggled to end the power of Christians in the Roman Empire. Since the day fifty years earlier that Constantine conquered in the sign of the cross, Christian influence had steadily grown. As Julian lay dying from a mortal wound he made the following remark:
"As he bled, the dying emperor groaned, "You have conquered, O Galilean," referring to Jesus Christ.
CLEMENT OF ROME: (100 A.D.)
Clement affirms the Resurrection, Gospels and that Jesus was sent to earth by God to take away our sins.
"Clement was the fourth bishop of Rome, the first being Peter. Did he know Peter and Paul? It is completely possible that those two Spirit-filled men taught him. Clement even wrote a letter to the Corinthian church that echoed the teachings of the apostles."
Ignatius of Antioch: (50-107 A.D.)
Disciple of the apostles Peter, Paul, and John, who was martyred for his faith in Jesus. He was obviously convinced that Jesus really had lived and that Jesus was all that the apostles has said He was.
"...nearness to the sword is nearness to God; to be among the wild beasts is to be in the arms of God; only let it be in the name of Jesus Christ. I endure all things that I may suffer together with him, since he who became perfect man strengthens me...We have not only to be called Christians, but to be Christians."
While the emperor Trajan was on a visit to Asia Minor, he arrested Ignatius. When the bishop confessed his faith in Christ, the Emperor sent him in chains to Rome to die. He was hustled to the arena at once and thrown to two fierce lions who immediately devoured him.
QUADRATUS: (125 A.D.)
Bishop of Athens and a disciple of the apostles. Church historian Eusebius has preserved the only work that we have from Quadratus.
"The deeds of our Saviour were always before you, for they were true miracles; those that were healed, those that were raised from the dead, who were seen, not only when healed and when raised, but were always present. They remained living a long time, not only whilst our Lord was on earth, but likewise when he had left the earth. So that some of them have also lived in our times."
Eusebius, IV, III
EPISTLE OF BARNABAS: (130-38 A.D.)
Mentions the Resurrection, miracles, content of the Gospels and the crucifixion of Jesus.
ARISTIDES: (138-161 A.D.)
Aristides was a second-century Christian believer and philosopher from Athens. This portion of his defense of Christianity was addressed to the Roman Emperor Antonius Pius, who reigned from 138-161 A.D.
"The Son of the most high God, revealed by the Holy Spirit, descended from heaven, born of a Hebrew Virgin. His flesh he received from the Virgin, and he revealed himself in the human nature as the Son of God. In his goodness which brought the glad tidings, he has won the whole world by his life-giving preaching...He selected twelve apostles and taught the whole world by his mediatorial, light-giving truth. And he was crucified, being pierced with nails by the Jews; and he rose from the dead and ascended to heaven. He sent the apostles into all the world and instructed all by divine miracles full of wisdom. Their preaching bears blossoms and fruits to this day, and calls the whole world to illumination."
Carey, "Aristides," 68.
JUSTIN MARTYR: (106-167 A.D.)
Justin Martyr is regarded as one of the greatest early Christian apologists. He was born around 100 A.D and was beheaded for his faith in Jesus in 167 A.D. He mentions as facts many things about Jesus and Christianity, such as: The Magi (wise men who brought gifts from Arabia), King Herod, His crucifixion, His garments parted among the Roman soldiers, the apostles leaving him on the night of his arrest, his fulfilled prophecies, His resurrection and His ascending into heaven among many others. These quotes can be found in his debate with Trypho the Jew.
HEGESIPPUS: (2 Century)
Eusebius draws the conclusion that Hegesippus was a Jew that wrote five books called, "Memoirs." Only fragments remain of his original work in the writings of Eusebius. They show that Hegesippus traveled extensively trying to determine if the stories of Jesus and the apostles were true. He found that they they were accurate, even in the troubled church in Corinth.
"The Corinthian church continued in the true doctrine until Primus became bishop. I mixed with them on my voyage to Rome and spent several days with the Corinthians, during which we were refreshed with the true doctrine. On arrival at Rome I pieced together the succession down to Anicetus, whose deacon was Eleutherus, Anicetus being succeeded by Soter and he by Eleutherus. In every line of bishops and in every city things accord with the preaching of the Law, the Prophets, and the Lord."
Eusebius, The History of the Church, 9.22.2.
TRAJAN: (53-117 A.D.)
Trajan is a Roman Emperor who wrote a letter [see letter] in response to the Governor of Asia Minor, Pliny the Younger. Pliny needed advice in dealing with "Christians" who renounced their belief in Jesus due to fear of torture and execution.
MACROBIUS: (4th-5th Century)
Pascal (Pensees) mentions a quote of Augustus Caesar as an evidence to the murder of the 7-20 male babies (this is based on the population of Bethlehem in 4-6 B.C., which was 700-1,000 people) by King Herod in Bethlehem (Matthew 2:16).
King Herod heard that a king was to be born and his fear and mental instability caused him to kill these male children under two years of age. King Herod killed his Wife, mother in law, and three sons. This is in character with his life of murder and paranoia. King Herod's reign was described by his enemies as, "He stole to the throne like a fox, ruled like a tiger, and died like a dog."
Saturnalia, lib. 2, ch.4.
HADRIAN: (106-167 A.D.)
Justin Martyr quotes this Roman Emperor's letter to Minucius Fundanus, proconsul of Asia Minor. This letter deals with accusations from pagans against the Christians.
"I have received the letter addressed to me by your predecessor Serenius Granianus, a most illustrious man; and this communication I am unwilling to pass over in silence, lest innocent persons be disturbed, and occasion be given to the informers for practicing villainy. Accordingly, if the inhabitants of your province will so far sustain this petition of theirs as to accuse the Christians in some court of law, I do not prohibit them from doing so. But I will not suffer them to make use of mere entreaties and outcries. For it is far more just, if any one desires to make an accusation, that you give judgment upon it. If, therefore, any one makes the accusation, and furnishes proof that the said men do anything contrary to the laws, you shall adjudge punishments in proportion to the offences. And this, by Hercules; you shall give special heed to, that if any man shall, through mere calumny, bring an accusation against any of these persons, you shall award to him more severe punishments in proportion to his wickedness."
Justin Martyr, The First Apology, Chapters, 68-69.
JUVENAL: (55 AD-127 AD)
Juvenal makes a reference of the tortures of Christians by Nero in Rome.
"But just describe Tigellinus and you will blaze amid those faggots in which men, with their throats tightly gripped, stand and burn and smoke, and you trace a broad furrow through the middle of the arena."
Satires, 1, lines 147-157.
SENECA: (3 B.C.-65 A.D.)
Seneca mentions the cruelties that Nero imposes upon Christians.
"The other kind of evil comes, so to speak, in the form of a huge parade. Surrounding it is a retinue of swords and fire and chains and a mob of beasts to be let loose upon the disemboweled entrails of men. Picture to yourself under his head the prison, the cross, the rack, the hook, and the stake which they drive straight through a man until it protrudes from his throat. Think of human limbs torn apart by chariots driven in opposite directions, of the terrible shirt smeared and interwoven with inflammable materials, and of all the other contrivances devised by cruelty, in addition to those which I have mentioned!"
Epistulae Morales, Epistle 14, "On the Reasons for Withdrawing from the World."
HIEROCLES: (AD 284-305)
A quote by Eusebius preserves some of the text of this lost work of Hierocles, Philalethes or Lover of Truth. In this quote, Hierocles condemns Peter and Paul as sorcerers. Again, their miracles could not be denied, rather they claimed that they used sorcery.
"And this point is also worth noticing, that whereas the tales of Jesus have been vamped up by Peter and Paul and a few others of the kind,--men who were liars and devoid of education and wizards."
Eusebius, The Treatise of Eusebius, ch. 2.
ANTONIUS PIUS: (86 AD to 161 AD)
A letter from the Roman Emperor Antoninus Pius to the general assembly in Asia Minor. This letter says that the officials in Aisa Minor were getting upset at the Christians in their province, and that no changes are to be made in Antoninus' method of dealing with them.
"The Emperor Caesar Titus AElius Adrianus Antoninus Augustus Pius, Supreme Pontiff, in the fifteenth year of his tribuneship, Consul for the third time, Father of the fatherland, to the Common Assembly of Asia, greeting: I should have thought that the gods themselves would see to it that such offenders should not escape. For if they had the power, they themselves would much rather punish those who refuse to worship them; but it is you who bring trouble on these persons, and accuse as the opinion of atheists that which they hold, and lay to their charge certain other things which we are unable to prove. But it would be advantageous to them that they should be thought to die for that of which they are accused, and they conquer you by being lavish of their lives rather than yield that obedience which you require of them. And regarding the earthquakes which have already happened and are now occurring, it is not seemly that you remind us of them, losing heart whenever they occur, and thus set your conduct in contrast with that of these men; for they have much greater confidence towards God than you yourselves have. And you, indeed, seem at such times to ignore the gods, and you neglect the temples, and make no recognition of the worship of God. And hence you are jealous of those who do serve Him, and persecute them to the death. Concerning such persons, some others also of the governors of provinces wrote to my most divine father; to whom he replied that they should not at all disturb such persons, unless they were found to be attempting anything against the Roman government. And to myself many have sent intimations regarding such persons, to whom I also replied in pursuance of my father's judgment. But if any one has a matter to bring against any person of this class, merely as such a person, let the accused be acquitted of the charge, even though he should be found to be such an one; but let the accuser he amenable to justice."
Justin Martyr, The First Apology, ch. 70.
Ancient Secular Writings about Jesus
Cornelius Tacitus (born A.D. 52-54) - A Roman historian, in A.D. 112, Governor of Asia, son in law of Julius Agricola, who was Governor of Britain A.D. 80-84. Writting of the reign of Nero, Tacitus alludes to the death of Christ and to the existence of Christians in Rome:
"But not all the relief that could come from man....availed to relieve Nero from the infamy of being believed to have ordered the conflagration, the fire of Rome. Hence to suppress the rumor, he falsely charged with the guilt, and punished with the most exquisite of tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of the name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius...."
Tacitus has a further reference to Christianity in a fragment of his "Histories", dealing with the burning of Jerusalem Temple in A.D. 70, preserved by Sulpicius Severus.
Lucian of Samosata - A satirist of the second century, who spoke scornfully of Christ and the Christians. He connected them with the synagogues of Palestine and alluded to Christ as:
"the man who was crucified in Palestine because He introduced this new cult into the world....Furthermore, their first lawgiver persuaded them that they were all brothers one of another after they have transgressed once for all by denying the Greek gods and by worshipping that crucified sophist Himself and living under His Laws." Lucian also mentions the Christians several times in other writings.
Flavius Josephus (born A.D. 37) - A Jewish historian, became a Pharisee at age 19; in A.D.66 he was the commander of the Jewish forces in Galilee. After being captured, he was attached to the Roman headquarters. He says in a hotly contested quotation:
"Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call Him a man, for He was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to Him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ, and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned Him to the cross, those that loved Him at the first did not forsake Him; for He appeared to them alive again in the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning Him. And the tribe of Christians so named for Him are not extinct at this day."
The Arabic text of this passage is as follows:
"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." The above passage is found in a Arabic manuscript. Bishop Agapius in the tenth century writes: We have found in many books of the philosophers that they refer to the day of the crucifixion of Christ" We also find from Josephus a reference to James the brother of Jesus, in Antiquities XX 9:1.
Last edited:
-about some guy named "Jesus Christ."Woody said:
Glad you agree.
The proof that Jesus lived is in His promise; "The things that I do shall you do also"
His people doing the same things empowered by the Spirit as Only He could.
That doesn't mean you should expect to see this proof with any old group that calls itself "christians"....no.
The scriptures say; "In that day seven women will take hold of one man, saying let us wear our own appearal, ect.......and (still) let us be called by your name.
Appearal is typed as Word....by teaching for commandments the traditions of men, they make the word of God of "non effect"
Now without getting too involved in the subject of the sovereignty of God (for that would take a book in itself) let me point out here that according to these verses, Jesus Christ is choosing His own bride just the same as men choose their brides today. The bride today does not simply decide she is going to take a certain man for a husband. No sir. It is the groom who decides and chooses a certain woman for his bride. (John 15:16, "Ye have not chosen Me; but I have chosen you.") Now according to the Word of God, the bride was chosen before the foundation of the world. This choosing of the bride was purposed in Himself. Ephesians 1:9. And in Romans 9:11 it says "That the purpose of God according to election might stand." You can't read it any other way. The heart purpose, the eternal purpose of God was to take a bride of His OWN choosing, and that purpose was in Himself, and being eternal was decreed before the foundation of the world.
Watch carefully now and see this. Before there was ever a speck of star dust; before God was God (God is an object of adoration and no one was there to worship Him, so He was at that time only potentially God.) and He was known only as eternal Spirit, the bride was already in His mind. She was existing in His thoughts. And what about those thoughts of God? They are eternal, are they not?
The eternal thoughts of God! Let me ask you, "Are the thoughts of God eternal?"
If you can see this, you will see many things.
God is unchangeable in both essence and behavior. We have studied that and proven that already. God is infinite in His abilities so therefore He as God must be omniscient. If He is omniscient, then He is not now learning, nor is He taking counsel even with Himself, nor is He at any time adding to His knowledge. If He can add to His knowledge, then He is not omniscient. The best we could say is that sometime He will be. But that is not Scriptural. He IS omniscient. He has never had a new thought about anything because all His thoughts He has always had and always will have, and knows the end from the beginning because He is God. THUS THE THOUGHTS OF GOD ARE ETERNAL. THEY ARE REAL. They are not simply like a man with a blueprint he has drawn up and which one day will be translated into substance and form, but they are already real and eternal, and part of God.
See how this works. God always had His thoughts for Adam. Adam, as His thoughts, was yet unexpressed. Psalms 139:15-16 will give you a little idea of this, "My substance was not hid from Thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in Thy book were all my members written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them." That, as I said, was not written about Adam but it gives you the idea and knowledge that the thought was there in His mind, and that thought was eternal and had to be expressed. So when Adam was formed of the dust of the earth and his spiritual being created by God, then Adam became God's thought expressed, and those eternal thoughts were now manifested.
Down through the centuries we could go. We find a Moses, a Jeremiah, a John the Baptist, and each one of these were God's eternal thought expressed in its season. Then we come to Jesus the LOGOS. He was the perfect and complete THOUGHT expressed and He became known as the Word. That is what He IS, and forever WILL BE.
Now it says that "He hath chosen us IN HIM (Jesus) before the foundation of the world." That means that we were right there WITH Him in the mind and thoughts of God before the foundation of the world. That gives an ETERNAL quality to the elect.
It is very apparent that she ought to be called that for she was predestinated in Him, came from the same source, was eternal with Him, and is now manifesting God in a many membered body whereas once God was manifested in ONE MEMBER, even our Lord Jesus Christ.
Now then, As the eternal Logos (God) was manifest in the Son, and in Jesus dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, and that Eternal One was the Father manifest in flesh, and thereby gained the title of Son, even so we, eternal in His thoughts in our turn became the many membered Spoken Word Seed, manifest in flesh, and those eternal thoughts now manifest in flesh are the sons of God, even as we are so called.
"But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ."
His people doing the same things empowered by the Spirit as Only He could.
That doesn't mean you should expect to see this proof with any old group that calls itself "christians"....no.
The scriptures say; "In that day seven women will take hold of one man, saying let us wear our own appearal, ect.......and (still) let us be called by your name.
Appearal is typed as Word....by teaching for commandments the traditions of men, they make the word of God of "non effect"
Now without getting too involved in the subject of the sovereignty of God (for that would take a book in itself) let me point out here that according to these verses, Jesus Christ is choosing His own bride just the same as men choose their brides today. The bride today does not simply decide she is going to take a certain man for a husband. No sir. It is the groom who decides and chooses a certain woman for his bride. (John 15:16, "Ye have not chosen Me; but I have chosen you.") Now according to the Word of God, the bride was chosen before the foundation of the world. This choosing of the bride was purposed in Himself. Ephesians 1:9. And in Romans 9:11 it says "That the purpose of God according to election might stand." You can't read it any other way. The heart purpose, the eternal purpose of God was to take a bride of His OWN choosing, and that purpose was in Himself, and being eternal was decreed before the foundation of the world.
Watch carefully now and see this. Before there was ever a speck of star dust; before God was God (God is an object of adoration and no one was there to worship Him, so He was at that time only potentially God.) and He was known only as eternal Spirit, the bride was already in His mind. She was existing in His thoughts. And what about those thoughts of God? They are eternal, are they not?
The eternal thoughts of God! Let me ask you, "Are the thoughts of God eternal?"
If you can see this, you will see many things.
God is unchangeable in both essence and behavior. We have studied that and proven that already. God is infinite in His abilities so therefore He as God must be omniscient. If He is omniscient, then He is not now learning, nor is He taking counsel even with Himself, nor is He at any time adding to His knowledge. If He can add to His knowledge, then He is not omniscient. The best we could say is that sometime He will be. But that is not Scriptural. He IS omniscient. He has never had a new thought about anything because all His thoughts He has always had and always will have, and knows the end from the beginning because He is God. THUS THE THOUGHTS OF GOD ARE ETERNAL. THEY ARE REAL. They are not simply like a man with a blueprint he has drawn up and which one day will be translated into substance and form, but they are already real and eternal, and part of God.
See how this works. God always had His thoughts for Adam. Adam, as His thoughts, was yet unexpressed. Psalms 139:15-16 will give you a little idea of this, "My substance was not hid from Thee, when I was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth. Thine eyes did see my substance, yet being unperfect; and in Thy book were all my members written, which in continuance were fashioned, when as yet there was none of them." That, as I said, was not written about Adam but it gives you the idea and knowledge that the thought was there in His mind, and that thought was eternal and had to be expressed. So when Adam was formed of the dust of the earth and his spiritual being created by God, then Adam became God's thought expressed, and those eternal thoughts were now manifested.
Down through the centuries we could go. We find a Moses, a Jeremiah, a John the Baptist, and each one of these were God's eternal thought expressed in its season. Then we come to Jesus the LOGOS. He was the perfect and complete THOUGHT expressed and He became known as the Word. That is what He IS, and forever WILL BE.
Now it says that "He hath chosen us IN HIM (Jesus) before the foundation of the world." That means that we were right there WITH Him in the mind and thoughts of God before the foundation of the world. That gives an ETERNAL quality to the elect.
It is very apparent that she ought to be called that for she was predestinated in Him, came from the same source, was eternal with Him, and is now manifesting God in a many membered body whereas once God was manifested in ONE MEMBER, even our Lord Jesus Christ.
Now then, As the eternal Logos (God) was manifest in the Son, and in Jesus dwelt all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, and that Eternal One was the Father manifest in flesh, and thereby gained the title of Son, even so we, eternal in His thoughts in our turn became the many membered Spoken Word Seed, manifest in flesh, and those eternal thoughts now manifest in flesh are the sons of God, even as we are so called.
"But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth His Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father. Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ."
Last edited:
One can expect nothing less from the Myth Soaked Horde.
"Feign Reason!"
"Feign Reason!"
Thanks for busting the data storage record Woody, but that tome does not impress anyone who has bothered to do some objective research. Simply put, anyone who wandered around raising the dead, healing the blind and feeding the multitudes would have generated volumes in the contemporary chronicles. Where are they?
The fact that any truth at all has survived, is in itself a miracle..stretched said:
(look how the press mutilates the daily news with thier spin stated as facts)..
God has protected His word.
Why....?
Because he is that Word.
There has been thousands of miracles right here today done by the body of christ, raising the dead, healing the sick.....discerning the secrets of the heart.
Do you think you'll see it on T.V.....?
What are you looking for....?
Last edited: