by ISP 172 Replies latest watchtower bible
ISP said: Hooberus, JM is the author of the argument and counter argument.
So if J.P. Holding (Christian appologist) writes out a dialogue with himself verses an anti-christian opponet and the anti-christian opponet says in the dailogue "I don't believe that Jesus Christ existed" is it then alright for you to say:
"I don't believe that Jesus Christ existed" Quote from J.P. Holding
Your last quote challenges the roman historian Tacitus reference to the crucifixion of Jesus Christ by Pilate. I hope to answer this shortly. Keep in mind though that are at least 8 separate early historical references to this event (the crucifixiuon by Piliate).
Isp,
Prof. Doughty states: "Furthermore, it is highly remarkable that no other ancient source associates Christians with the burning of Rome until Sulpicuis Servitus (Sacred History, 2.29) in the fifth century (c.408)."
Be that as it may, he is not the first to associate Nero with the persecution of Christians in Rome ( from 64-67 A.D)., whatever the reason. See "Tertullian" (197-220 A.D.), Chapter V of "The Apology": "Consult your histories;you will find that Nero was the first who assailed with the imperial sword the Christian sect, making profess then especially at Rome."
If there are Christians in Rome in 64 A.D. that is a bit too uncomfortable for those who purport they did not exist until the second century. Therefore, every effort must be taken to try to prove that the Christians doctored up all those early documents to their advantage.
This kind of exchange is fruitless. Anyone can go to these websites themselves and red the arguements for themselves. All I want to say about hooberus' post earlier about suggesting that Price was dishonest or ignorant about the Apollonius stoy and it's date of writing, is that it really illustrates how blindly he reads the tektonik site and accepts their spin on matters without asking if Price's comment may have been said for a good reason. The Apollonius (4 BC-?) story written a hundred years or so after his death is of course filled wth myth and legend, that is the point!! He (if historical) was elevated to godship a few short years ater his death. The legends about healing, resurrections etc. were part of the genere of deities of those centuries. The same stories were said about Socrates and dozens of others. This illustrates the prevalence of these types of legends. The jesus story as nothing to differentiate it from these others other than it's Jewish flavor. And this the point Price was making.
Isp,
Nor must you forget that Suetonius, even earlier than Tacitus and Tertullian (115 A.D.) in the Lives of the Caesars: Nero, chapter 16:2 also acknowledges the persecution of Christians by Nero. "Punishment by Nero was inflicted on the Christians, a class of men given to a new and mischievous superstition."
ISP, WHAT ABOUT THE HOSTILE WITNESSES? The only thing really you need to consider after reading all this is that Peter, Paul, Polycarp, etc., so many throughout history, on and on and on DIED WILLINGLY FOR CHRIST. THEY WERE MARTYRED. THAT IS ALSO HISTORICAL. How many men were willing to die on account of a mythical god or goddess? And again, why was Jesus' existence not questioned until the EIGHTEENTH CENTURY? Why do we not find loads of people writing about the 'mythical' Christ, from it's would be 'concoction?' Why instead do we find HISTORIANS testifying of Him?: the biblical data is attested to by such distinguished Roman and Jewish historians as Josephus, Tacitus, Secundus, and a host of others. Why do you not want to believe Jesus actually existed? And they (apostles) were killed as martyrs. To be witness of His resurrection did mean to be a martyr, and it is interesting that the Greek martyrion means both 'witness' and 'martyr'. I can trust in the Testimony of the Apostles because of those twelve, eleven died as martyrs. They died because they preached the resurrection of Jesus and that He was manifested God in the flesh. They were tortured, flogged and were brutally dead: 1. Petar - crucified 2. Andrew - crucified 3. Matthias - killed by the sword 4. John - died by the natural death 5. James, the son of Alpheus - crucified 6. Philip - crucified 7. Simeon - crucified 8. Tadeus - killed by arrows 9. James, brother of Jesus - stoned 10. Thomas - killed by the sword 11. Bartholomew - crucified 12. James, son of Zebedee - killed by the sword died willingly on account of their LORD! How strange that most all of Jesus followers, as recordered in Scripture, would just die for Him,,,ESPECIALLY BECAUSE MOST OF THEM WERE NOT THE BIBLICAL WRITERS!!!!!!!!! If CHRIST was a myth, and CHRIST was written of by persons who they wouldn't have even known since it was written in the 'second century' then how the hell did they know to die for him, and why would they die for a myth that hadn't been invented, and why would not just one, but everyone save the traitor Judas, willingly die after being tried on account OF HIM, and then REFUSING TO DENY HIM, WHEN APPARENTLY THEY WOULDN'T have KNOWN HIM? They died for CHRIST WILLINGLY, BECAUSE THEY KNEW HIM. Who, might I ask, died for Aphrodite, Athena, Zeus (ehhh, whichever gods, can't think of the right ones) , ,,,in fact, who was killed for BELIEVING in them? Meaning, that when threatened with corporal punishment, STILL would not budge to even SPEAK negatively about these myths, or deny these mythical dieties? These men were killed for CHRIST, for their BELIEF based on HIS ACTUAL EXISTENCE ON EARTH...HIS LIFE, HIS BURIAL, AND ESPECIALLY HIS RESURRECTION! The Encyclical Epistle of the Church at Smyrna, Concerning the Martyrdom of St. Polycarp The Church of God which sojourns at Smyrna, to the Church of God sojourning in Philomelium, and to all the congregations of the Holy and Catholic Church in every place: Mercy, peace, and love from God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, be multiplied. CHAPTER I -- SUBJECT OF WHICH WE WRITE. We have written to you, brethren, as to what relates to the martyrs, and especially to the blessed Polycarp, who put an end to the persecution, having, as it were, set a seal upon it by his martyrdom. For almost all the events that happened previously [to this one], took place that the Lord might show us from above a martyrdom becoming the Gospel. For he waited to be delivered up, even as the Lord had done, that we also might become his followers, while we look not merely at what concerns ourselves but have regard also to our neighbours. For it is the part of a true and well-founded love, not only to wish one's self to be saved, but also all the brethren. CHAPTER II -- THE WONDERFUL CONSTANCY OF THE MARTYRS. All the martyrdoms, then, were blessed and noble which took place according to the will of God. For it becomes us who profess greater piety than others, to ascribe the authority over all things to God. And truly, who can fail to admire their nobleness of mind, and their patience, with that love towards their Lord which they displayed?--who, when they were so torn with scourges, that the frame of their bodies, even to the very inward veins and arteries, was laid open, still patiently endured, while even those that stood by pitied and bewailed them. But they reached such a pitch of magnanimity, that not one of them let a sigh or a groan escape them; thus proving to us all that those holy martyrs of Christ, at the very time when they suffered such torments, were absent from the body, or rather, that the Lord then stood by them, and communed with them. And, looking to the grace of Christ, they despised all the torments of this world, redeeming themselves from eternal punishment by [the suffering of] a single hour. For this reason the fire of their savage executioners appeared cool to them. For they kept before their view escape from that fire which is eternal and never shall be quenched, and looked forward with the eyes of their heart to those good things which are laid up for such as endure; things "which ear hath not heard, nor eye seen, neither have entered into the heart of man," but were revealed by the Lord to them, inasmuch as they were no longer men, but had already become angels. And, in like manner, those who were condemned to the wild beasts endured dreadful tortures, being stretched out upon beds full of spikes, and subjected to various other kinds of torments, in order that, if it were possible, the tyrant might, by their lingering tortures, lead them to a denial [of Christ].
ISP,
WHAT ABOUT THE HOSTILE WITNESSES?
The only thing really you need to consider after reading all this is that Peter, Paul, Polycarp, etc., so many throughout history, on and on and on DIED WILLINGLY FOR CHRIST. THEY WERE MARTYRED. THAT IS ALSO HISTORICAL. How many men were willing to die on account of a mythical god or goddess? And again, why was Jesus' existence not questioned until the EIGHTEENTH CENTURY? Why do we not find loads of people writing about the 'mythical' Christ, from it's would be 'concoction?' Why instead do we find HISTORIANS testifying of Him?: the biblical data is attested to by such distinguished Roman and Jewish historians as Josephus, Tacitus, Secundus, and a host of others. Why do you not want to believe Jesus actually existed?
And they (apostles) were killed as martyrs. To be witness of His resurrection did mean to be a martyr, and it is interesting that the Greek martyrion means both 'witness' and 'martyr'. I can trust in the Testimony of the Apostles because of those twelve, eleven died as martyrs. They died because they preached the resurrection of Jesus and that He was manifested God in the flesh. They were tortured, flogged and were brutally dead:
1. Petar - crucified
2. Andrew - crucified
3. Matthias - killed by the sword
4. John - died by the natural death
5. James, the son of Alpheus - crucified
6. Philip - crucified
7. Simeon - crucified
8. Tadeus - killed by arrows
9. James, brother of Jesus - stoned
10. Thomas - killed by the sword
11. Bartholomew - crucified
12. James, son of Zebedee - killed by the sword
died willingly on account of their LORD! How strange that most all of Jesus followers, as recordered in Scripture, would just die for Him,,,ESPECIALLY BECAUSE MOST OF THEM WERE NOT THE BIBLICAL WRITERS!!!!!!!!! If CHRIST was a myth, and CHRIST was written of by persons who they wouldn't have even known since it was written in the 'second century' then how the hell did they know to die for him, and why would they die for a myth that hadn't been invented, and why would not just one, but everyone save the traitor Judas, willingly die after being tried on account OF HIM, and then REFUSING TO DENY HIM, WHEN APPARENTLY THEY WOULDN'T have KNOWN HIM? They died for CHRIST WILLINGLY, BECAUSE THEY KNEW HIM. Who, might I ask, died for Aphrodite, Athena, Zeus (ehhh, whichever gods, can't think of the right ones) , ,,,in fact, who was killed for BELIEVING in them? Meaning, that when threatened with corporal punishment, STILL would not budge to even SPEAK negatively about these myths, or deny these mythical dieties?
These men were killed for CHRIST, for their BELIEF based on HIS ACTUAL EXISTENCE ON EARTH...HIS LIFE, HIS BURIAL, AND ESPECIALLY HIS RESURRECTION!
The Encyclical Epistle of the Church at Smyrna, Concerning the Martyrdom of St. Polycarp
The Church of God which sojourns at Smyrna, to the Church of God sojourning in Philomelium, and to all the congregations of the Holy and Catholic Church in every place: Mercy, peace, and love from God the Father, and our Lord Jesus Christ, be multiplied.
CHAPTER I -- SUBJECT OF WHICH WE WRITE.
We have written to you, brethren, as to what relates to the martyrs, and especially to the blessed Polycarp, who put an end to the persecution, having, as it were, set a seal upon it by his martyrdom. For almost all the events that happened previously [to this one], took place that the Lord might show us from above a martyrdom becoming the Gospel. For he waited to be delivered up, even as the Lord had done, that we also might become his followers, while we look not merely at what concerns ourselves but have regard also to our neighbours. For it is the part of a true and well-founded love, not only to wish one's self to be saved, but also all the brethren.
CHAPTER II -- THE WONDERFUL CONSTANCY OF THE MARTYRS.
All the martyrdoms, then, were blessed and noble which took place according to the will of God. For it becomes us who profess greater piety than others, to ascribe the authority over all things to God. And truly, who can fail to admire their nobleness of mind, and their patience, with that love towards their Lord which they displayed?--who, when they were so torn with scourges, that the frame of their bodies, even to the very inward veins and arteries, was laid open, still patiently endured, while even those that stood by pitied and bewailed them. But they reached such a pitch of magnanimity, that not one of them let a sigh or a groan escape them; thus proving to us all that those holy martyrs of Christ, at the very time when they suffered such torments, were absent from the body, or rather, that the Lord then stood by them, and communed with them. And, looking to the grace of Christ, they despised all the torments of this world, redeeming themselves from eternal punishment by [the suffering of] a single hour. For this reason the fire of their savage executioners appeared cool to them. For they kept before their view escape from that fire which is eternal and never shall be quenched, and looked forward with the eyes of their heart to those good things which are laid up for such as endure; things "which ear hath not heard, nor eye seen, neither have entered into the heart of man," but were revealed by the Lord to them, inasmuch as they were no longer men, but had already become angels. And, in like manner, those who were condemned to the wild beasts endured dreadful tortures, being stretched out upon beds full of spikes, and subjected to various other kinds of torments, in order that, if it were possible, the tyrant might, by their lingering tortures, lead them to a denial [of Christ].
Kenneson a 'great multitude' of persecuted christians in Rome around 60 CE is most unlikely.It is more likely that Nero rounded up criminals guilty of all misdemeanours to divert attention from the fire situation.
The problem with all of this is that the created personality of Jesus is so immense. He did so much, said so much in terms of his teachings, parables, illustrations that people could reason that it is remarkable that no one cared to write about it at the time. If you believe in the 'inspired' scriptures, I am sure God would have wanted the 'gospel' accounts to have been recorded straight away and distributed. They would have been vital in establishing the early church in the years after Jesus supposed death circa 33CE. (If god only had the WTS in those days!)
It is remarkable that Paul says so little about Jesus' life, teachings, parables etc. Many of which could have been used to sort out problems that he had to deal with.When he discussed neutrality, there was the perfect opportunity to quote Jesus 'give Caesars things to Caesar...etc.' but he did not. He could have killed off counter arguments in a flash by quoting Jesus but he does not and sometimes his authority/position was attacked. Today, the christian belief system is consumed with a study of the gospels and Acts when these books are highly unreliable and date circa 2nd Century. The odd references here and there to matters of interest can be explained but the overall silence is deafening.
There should be a wealth of references by so many individuals, educated and otherwise bearing in mind Jesus preached to the everyday people compiled at the time.
What we do see is where there have been opportunities to embellish or interpolate it has been taken with the view of trying to confirm the historicity of Jesus. The inference is that the new religion was under attack and it sought establish itself retrospectively in the second century. The creation of such a history can be powerful nevertheless. The WTS has created its own history, some of it retrospectively. People are willing to die for it.
ISP
ISP
Isp,
The bottom line is that Suetonius, Tacitus and Tertullian attest that there were Christians persecuted under Nero (64-67 A.D.), whether it was a great multitude or a handful and whether there were other criminals also rounded up. THIS is BEFORE the second century. So your argument that "the inference ... that the new religion...sought to establish itself retrospectively in the second century" is mute. You are correct, however, in stating that it was "under attack"--beginning with Nero. One can hardly persecute what did not exist.
peaceful pete said: This kind of exchange is fruitless. Anyone can go to these websites themselves and red the arguements for themselves. All I want to say about hooberus' post earlier about suggesting that Price was dishonest or ignorant about the Apollonius stoy and it's date of writing, is that it really illustrates how blindly he reads the tektonik site and accepts their spin on matters without asking if Price's comment may have been said for a good reason.
I understood the point that Price was making (the general worldwide Mythic Hero Archetype claim)contrary to your cliam that I "blindly" read the tektonics site. My post regarding Apollonius: "Apparently Price is attempting to say that the biblical writers received inspiration from "the worldwide Mythic Hero Archetype" He lists several examples. here is some important information on one of these "heroes" I'll try to check on the rest time allowin." was simply to add information that the story of Apollonius could not have been a source for the Biblical accounts of Jesus.
peacefulpete said: The Apollonius (4 BC-?) story written a hundred years or so after his death is of course filled wth myth and legend, that is the point!! He (if historical) was elevated to godship a few short years ater his death. The legends about healing, resurrections etc. were part of the genere of deities of those centuries. The same stories were said about Socrates and dozens of others. This illustrates the prevalence of these types of legends. The jesus story as nothing to differentiate it from these others other than it's Jewish flavor. And this the point Price was making.
The link that I posted listed several reasons why the situation with Jesus has several things to differentiate it as being historical from the others.
http://www.tektonics.org/tekton_04_02_04_APT.html
Question: Does any of this sound like what we find in the Gospels? Of course not; the Gospels lack the outrageous and dramatic flair that is found in the story of Apollonius; thus they should not be used in comparison.
