What about 'Antiquities of the Jews' by Josephus?
Book 20 chapter 9 verse 1 and Book 18 chapter 3 verse 3. Both instances mention Jesus and calls him 'the Christ'.
I Want Proof Jesus Even Existed
by Farkel 199 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
-
James Brown
I am quite aware of the fact that the ONLY evidence of Jesus comes from his OWN followers who didn't even bother to write down his life for decades after Jesus "died." Don't know about you, but if I saw all that shit, I would have gone home and written three books about it that same day!
I would like better proof that Jesus existed also.
But to play the Devils advocate. I dont think Jesus Followers could read and write. All they could do was repeat the stories
untill they got somebody who could write to copy them down.
I dont think they could go to the store and buy a spiral notebook and a bic pen or even a pencil.
They were poor fishermen, today day many Americans in the working class cant read or write.
They say a lot of college graduates cant read or write.
In the end according to his book either you have faith or you dont.
The only way you get faith is by asking for it.
Your not going to ask for it if you are against Jesus.
Thats just the way it is.
-
Witness My Fury
What about 'Antiquities of the Jews' by Josephus?
Book 20 chapter 9 verse 1 and Book 18 chapter 3 verse 3. Both instances mention Jesus and calls him 'the Christ'.
http://www.truthbeknown.com/josephus.htm
Say it aint so?
-
sabastious
Because Ehrman believes his own argument?
It's not just a fleeting belief. He feels strongly enough to use near absolute language. It seems you are just putting up your opinion against his, and he's a scholar and you are not (at least I don't think so). That makes your opinion on the matter next to worthless, IF you put it up against his, which you did (if you are a Bible scholar, feel free to disregard that statement).
Even Ehrman only believes Jesus actually said and did a fraction of what it says in the gospels. If you reach a point where 80%, 90% or more of the gospels is viewed as being accretions, is it really stretch to go a bit further and say that maybe it was all made up? Maybe a preacher called Jesus did exist, or a few preachers called Jesus in fact, but were any of them sufficiently close to the Jesus of the gospels to be identified with that character?
This thread is not about whether the man that existed is accurately portrayed in the Gospels, that's a straw man in this context. The title is pretty clear. No one can give proof, but there is strong evidence that suggests a certain man existed that did some really world breaking things. We don't know for sure what they were, but we know they existed. This leaves 99.9% of it up to the imagination which means there will be a wide range of explanations. That's why there are so many denominations.
Ehrman did such a poor job of defending the historical Jesus
I would highly disagree and so would Ehrman because of his use of the word "certainly."
cer·tain·ly /'s?rtnle/
Adverb: - Undoubtedly; definitely; surely: "it certainly isn't worth risking your life".
Maybe Ehrman wouldn't die for his conclusions on Jesus' existence, but he surely put his career at risk by writing that article because of inferior opinons like that of yours in this thread. He knew what he was doing though, and I applaud him for being truly scientific and without bias.
-Sab
-
elderelite
Wnd of course sab you, as one of those he talks to, arnt biased at all.....
-
sabastious
Wnd of course sab you, as one of those he talks to, arnt biased at all.....
He doesn't talk to me, where did you get this?
-Sab
-
slimboyfat
This thread is not about whether the man that existed is accurately portrayed in the Gospels, that's a straw man in this context
If the historical Jesus existed, but he bears no relation to the Jesus portrayed in the gospels, then really, in what sense did "Jesus" exist? If we are talking about people who claimed to be the Messiah then there were plenty of them around. Isn't that an old joke in fact: "I don't believe Jesus existed, but there was probably someone who claimed to be the Messiah who went by the same name as Jesus."
Which makes you really wonder, if we don't believe the gospels, then what does it even mean to say, "Jesus certainly existed". If only the name and the bare fact that he claimed to be the Messiah is all that is left, then there were probably many Jesuses.
-
sabastious
If the historical Jesus existed, but he bears no relation to the Jesus portrayed in the gospels, then really, in what sense did "Jesus" exist? If we are talking about people who claimed to be the Messiah then there were plenty of them around. Isn't that an old joke in fact: "I don't believe Jesus existed, but there was probably someone who claimed to be the Messiah who went by the same name as Jesus."
Which makes you really wonder, if we don't believe the gospels, then what does it even mean to say, "Jesus certainly existed". If only the name and the bare fact that he claimed to be the Messiah is all that is left, then there were probably many Jesuses.
In the western world we have freedom of religion. This actually allots all citizens the right to believe something that is provably false. Free speech allows them to share their message with others regardless of it's demonstrability. We now know the obvious ill effects that come from widespread belief of provably false ideas. What the anti-theist movement accomplishes is the exposing of these lies for the betterment of society at large. The subsequent informed generation then doesn't further the destructive ideals into the future. This creates a problem, however.
Let's say little Timmy has two anti-theist parents. What happens if little Timmy wants to take the evidenced argument that "a man who claimed to be the Son of God existed in the 1st century and did awesome things" and expound upon it? Would that not be the very same first step that lead to the debacle that created the anti-theists in the first place? This is where the FREE WILL argument comes into place. The parents, even though damaged by society, still have the choice to allow their child to engage in the same behavior or not. If they disallow it, they will be breaking the tenent of freedom of religion which created their civilization. This exposes a life truth in my opinion because it's up to the parents to not only trust themselves as parents, but their kids as products of their parenthood. Will little Timmy start a cult and try to rule the world? The answer, as it always has been, is that we'll have to wait and see to find out.
-Sab
-
Hortensia
I don't have the proof you want; no one does. My evidence is based on faith and it's evident from all you said in your post that you are without faith. It must be sad being you, too.
I always wonder why so many people feel so smug about believing the unbelievable on the basis of no evidence at all.
-
slimboyfat
Sab was that post intended to be a response to my post? I don't follow most of it but among other things you say:
What happens if little Timmy wants to take the evidenced argument that "a man who claimed to be the Son of God existed in 1st century and did awesome things" and expound upon it?
Many scholars who believe in a historical Jesus do not believe that he claimed to be the Son of God. Is that Ehrman's view? I doubt it. Ehrman has argued that Jesus was an apocalyptic prophet. The idea that he as the Son of God came later.