06 Apr 12
9 edits
Originally posted by VoidSpirit
nobody has to confirm he was the son of god. the fact remains that no contemporary historian (not necessarily atheist) mentions jesus at all, never mind him being the son of god.
all you have is hearsay, your argument has not changed this fact.
nobody has to confirm he was the son of god. the fact remains that no contemporary historian (not necessarily atheist) mentions jesus at all, never mind him being the son of god.
all you have is hearsay, your argument has not changed this fact.
Dr. Gary Habermas - a few comments on historicity of Jesus:
Non-Biblical Evidence as Proof for the Existence of Jesus - Four videos (With critiques of popular skeptical crticisms: )
&feature=related
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
06 Apr 12
Originally posted by jaywilltacitus was born 20 years after jesus died, hardly makes him a contemporary. roman historians were also very careful to reflect the tastes and opinions of their patrons. luckily we can get an accurate view of roman history because we can cross reference many historians and social commentators, even then we still have to do a fair bit of guess work. romans also had a tendency to support local religions, so although im not saying all of what tacitus says is wrong, it can hardly be called historically accurate and reliable. if you compare what information we have on tiberius to what we have on jesus, it shows just how relevant this jesus character was to the historians of jesus's time.nobody has to confirm he was the son of god. the fact remains that no contemporary historian (not necessarily atheist) mentions jesus at all, never mind him being the son of god.
all you have is hearsay, your argument has not changed this fact.
Dr. Gary Habermas - a few comments on historicity of Jesus:
http://www.youtube.com/w ...[text shortened]... of popular skeptical crticisms🙂
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrRQqYGf4O0&feature=related
06 Apr 12
5 edits
Originally posted by stellspalfieWatch all four videos first then come back with a comment.
tacitus was born 20 years after jesus died, hardly makes him a contemporary. roman historians were also very careful to reflect the tastes and opinions of their patrons. luckily we can get an accurate view of roman history because we can cross reference many historians and social commentators, even then we still have to do a fair bit of guess work. roma ...[text shortened]... n jesus, it shows just how relevant this jesus character was to the historians of jesus's time.
I am not accepting any off the cuff skeptical chats about this research.
Non-Biblical Evidence as Proof for the Existence of Jesus - Four videos (With critiques of popular skepitical criticisms)
&feature=related
I am now watching #3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=-qUcXXbde4w&feature=endscreen
- Joined
- 16 Jan 07
- Moves
- 95105
06 Apr 12
Originally posted by jaywillall 4 videos!!!......okay, but ive got to clean and put to bed 2 baked bean covered children, make my wife some food and then formulate a theory that will once and for all put an end to this debate!!!
Watch all four videos first then come back with a comment.
I am not accepting any off the cuff skeptical chats about this research.
[b] Non-Biblical Evidence as Proof for the Existence of Jesus - Four videos (With critiques of popular skeptical criticisms)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrRQqYGf4O0&feature=related
I am now watching #3
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=-qUcXXbde4w&feature=endscreen[/b]
06 Apr 12
2 edits
Originally posted by stellspalfie19 non biblcal writers on Jesus:
all 4 videos!!!......okay, but ive got to clean and put to bed 2 baked bean covered children, make my wife some food and then formulate a theory that will once and for all put an end to this debate!!!
&feature=related
All we know of the existence of Socrates is because of those things said about him by students of his.
No problem with most skeptics of the Christian faith with the existence of Socrates. Double standard.
07 Apr 12
Originally posted by jaywillthe first and earliest source cited in the 4 part video is tacitus, who was not a contemporary of jesus and was a known friend of pliny the younger who persecuted christians.nobody has to confirm he was the son of god. the fact remains that no contemporary historian (not necessarily atheist) mentions jesus at all, never mind him being the son of god.
all you have is hearsay, your argument has not changed this fact.
Dr. Gary Habermas - a few comments on historicity of Jesus:
http://www.youtube.com/w ...[text shortened]... popular skeptical crticisms: )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrRQqYGf4O0&feature=related
what this amounts to is evidence for the existence of christians, just like i've been saying all along. it does not constitute evidence for the existence of christ.
07 Apr 12
Originally posted by jaywillnone of those 19 were contemporaries of jesus, they were all reporting on the existence of christians and sometimes their doctrine.
19 non biblcal writers on Jesus:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O5nA-JzIQ8I&feature=related
All we know of the existence of [b]Socrates is because of those things said about him by students of his.
No problem with most skeptics of the Christian faith with the existence of Socrates. Double standard.[/b]
we are not discussing the historicity of socrates, so do not make any assumptions about double standards.
07 Apr 12
Originally posted by RJHindsi considered that evidence a long time ago.
Are you a lawyer or judge by profession?
P.S. Would you consider the following evidence?
http://powertochange.com/students/ossuary/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-eisenman/the-james-ossuary-is-it-a_b_1005052.html
he's kind of glib on the subject, skip down to the boxed text with the light blue background.
until the evidence changes, it's likely a forgery.
07 Apr 12
Originally posted by RJHindsi stopped watching the video before the end of the 1st minute when ehrman made the absurd statement: "i don't think there is any serious historian doubts the existence of jesus"
How about this interview with an agnostic liberal historian?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUQMJR2BP1w&feature=related
he lost all credibility with that statement. serious historians have been doubting the existence of jesus for centuries. but he has a book to sell on guess what? the historicity of jesus. go figure.
07 Apr 12
Originally posted by VoidSpiritOkay, Jesus never existed. But I am going to put my faith in Christ, whoever
i stopped watching the video before the end of the 1st minute when ehrman made the absurd statement: "i don't think there is any serious historian doubts the existence of jesus"
he lost all credibility with that statement. serious historians have been doubting the existence of jesus for centuries. but he has a book to sell on guess what? the historicity of jesus. go figure.
he is, for my salvation because I can't save myself. HalleluYah !!!
07 Apr 12
4 edits
Originally posted by VoidSpirit
none of those 19 were contemporaries of jesus, they were all reporting on the existence of christians and sometimes their doctrine.
we are not discussing the historicity of socrates, so do not make any assumptions about double standards.
none of those 19 were contemporaries of jesus, they were all reporting on the existence of christians and sometimes their doctrine.
we are not discussing the historicity of socrates, so do not make any assumptions about double standards.
Before the 18th Century please list the major historians that doubted the existence of the man Jesus.
Not interested in "Johnny Come Latelys" of the last 300 years. Who, in say, the first six centuries C.E. doubted that a Jesus of Nazareth ever existed (belief in His claims aside) ?