Originally posted by FMFYou and I will have to agree to disagree.
Josephus' reference was written 50 or 60 years after Jesus is said to have died. What it says about 'early Christians' may well constitute primary source material, but in terms of what it 'proves' about the historicalness of Jesus, AppleChess is mistaken.
My linchpin for Christ's historicity is not Josephus. I feel you are deviating from academic prose to something else.
Easy tactic to write off sources. Maybe you should convincingly argue why you can afford to take Josephus so lightly?
Btw, read the article I posted above. I think you would find it interesting at least. It's the one by Matthew Parris.
Originally posted by AppleChessYou introduced Josephus as 'proof' of Jesus' historicness, not me. Personally, I have no problem with accepting that a Jewish rabbi called Jesus lived and preached at the beginning of the C1st. I just find it interesting that you would make claims about the significance of Josephus' writing that you are back peddling from only two posts-on-a-message-board later.
My linchpin for Christ's historicity is not Joseohus. I feel you are deviating from academic prose to something else.
Originally posted by AppleChessI haven't written him off. There were Christians in 90-100 AD and they believed what they believed, I think Josephus as a source supports this.
Easy tactic to write off sources. Maybe you should convincingly argue why you can afford to take Josephus so lightly?
Originally posted by AppleChessI looked into this a little while ago. There is virtually no evidence for an historical Christ. The only sources are the Bible, Josephus and Tacitus. The Tacitus mention is at best ambiguous, he mentions a Chrestus who was causing unrest amongst the Jews in Rome. There are two relevant sections in Josephus, the major one is clearly a later redaction. The reference to James the Just's trial is probably genuine.
You and I will have to agree to disagree.
My linchpin for Christ's historicity is not Josephus. I feel you are deviating from academic prose to something else.
Easy tactic to write off sources. Maybe you should convincingly argue why you can afford to take Josephus so lightly?
Btw, read the article I posted above. I think you would find it interesting at least. It's the one by Matthew Parris.
However, if you want to present a list of other sources I'd be interested to see them.
Originally posted by AppleChess"Great minds discuss ideas".........can be claimed by any group of people........
I posted this in a thread in the chess forum in response to a post. It fits here better. So I thought I'd post it here too.
Thread 164029 It is towards the bottom of page 6 in the thread.
"I realize this is a chess forum and not a spirituality forum, but I feel this is necessary to say still since you put it on display in this thread. ...[text shortened]... she was a philosopher or theologian.
Feel free to take this to the spirituality forums now."
e.g. 5 bank robbers are sitting around the table discussing ideas about their next hoist.
Originally posted by AppleChessWell it was you who said "Then you haven't studied much history. Secular sources, Josephus etc, confirm his existence." So I think you misunderstand the difference between what 'studied much history' ought to mean, and your own presumably sincere assertions about what you believe about history.
I think you misunderstand proofs for support.
5 edits
Originally posted by AppleChessYou should reconsider your position. While Jesus walked the earth, He spoke of many ideas - many of which are quite deep and profound.
I posted this in a thread in the chess forum in response to a post. It fits here better. So I thought I'd post it here too.
Thread 164029 It is towards the bottom of page 6 in the thread.
"I realize this is a chess forum and not a spirituality forum, but I feel this is necessary to say still since you put it on display in this thread. ...[text shortened]... she was a philosopher or theologian.
Feel free to take this to the spirituality forums now."
Jesus repeatedly emphasized the importance of His words:
That one must understand His words.
That one must not only understand His words - one must believe His words.
That one must not only believe His words - one must follow His words.
That one must not only follow His words - one must keep His words.
The following is but one example of the importance Jesus put on His words:
John 6
63 "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing; the words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life." 64 "But there are some of you who do not believe.”...
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneMaybe you would be wise to heed them. 😏
You should reconsider your position. While Jesus walked the earth, He spoke of many ideas - many of which are quite deep and profound.
Jesus repeatedly emphasized the importance of His words:
That one must understand His words.
That one must not only understand His words - one must believe His words.
That one must not only believe His words - one m ...[text shortened]... poken to you are spirit and are life." 64 "But there are some of you who do not believe.”...[/b]
Originally posted by AppleChessHere I am, see if you can force me.
Regardless of your opinions about Christianity, most will be forced to admit that the person of Christ stands in history as a giant-the ideas are important but less so.
What do you mean by 'the person of Christ'? In what way did it 'stand out in history as a giant'?
I certainly think that some ideas attributed to Jesus have resulted in several major world religions, but I am not convinced any person called Jesus or Christ actually existed - certainly I am pretty sure much of the accounts in the gospels are fabricated.