Secular Evidence Of The Existence Of Jesus

[♦ ficino ♦]

 

A book written by Pliny in 112 AD speaks about Christianity in the providence of Bithynia, and provides many facts about Jesus. 

 

Just rereading your OP.  Pliny's letter to Trajan provides zero facts about Jesus.

[Brother Jeff]

Well, I see that this topic has already been dealt with well and extensively, but I'll add my thoughts.

 

Jesus never existed. He never lived, never died, and never rose again. Jesus is a MYTH. He ranks very high on Lord Raglan's hero scale, along with other mythical characters such as Hercules, Perseus, and King Arthur. See:

 

http://department.monm.edu/classics/courses/clas230/mythdocuments/heropattern/

 

If Jesus was real, why does he rank so high on this scale and sound so much like a typical MYTH?

 

See the works of Earl Doherty (The Jesus Puzzle), which is available here:

 

http://www.amazon.com/The-Jesus-Puzzle-Christianity-Challenging/dp/096892591X/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1384542549&sr=8-1&keywords=earl+doherty

 

Also see the book, "Nailed: Ten Myths that Prove Jesus Never Existed at All. I wish I was at home in Alaska right now so I could refer to it. Lots of great points, including the fact that NONE of Jesus' alleged great activities were recorded by contemporary historians, who SHOULD HAVE NOTICED HIM!

 

http://www.amazon.com/Nailed-Christian-Myths-Jesus-Existed/dp/0557709911/ref=sr_1_2_bnp_1_pap?ie=UTF8&qid=1384542691&sr=8-2&keywords=nailed

 

Also see this site, which dispenses with the alleged secular references to Jesus:

 

http://www.nobeliefs.com/exist.htm

 

Glory!

[bornagainathiest]

Both scriptural and secular evidence for Jesus are irrelevant if the Bible itself fails at Genesis 1:1. 

 

No creator is needed, thank you very much!

 

I'd be happy to explain what I mean here SD4M, but only if you retract your reply to WarriorPoet, in post #63 of the thread Florduh locked.  (You can do the retraction here or elsewhere... but we don't talk unless you do it.)

 

Just as a reminder, here's part of my reply to you, from that thread.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your information and understanding of what you're presenting here [Einstein's Cosmological Constant theory] aren't just seriously compromised - they're flat-out wrong!

Check out the facts here... http://en.wikipedia....ogical_constant

Now, if you come clean and admit that you're wrong and misinformed, I'll be happy to discuss creatio ex nihilo, the current state of cosmology and the Big bang with you.  That's my price and it's non-negotiable.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I'll show you how the Bible fails at Genesis 1:1 (invalidating everything after it, including the Gospels) after you admit your errors and retract them.

 

Over to you,

 

BAA

 

[Brother Jeff]

Both scriptural and secular evidence for Jesus are irrelevant if the Bible itself fails at Genesis 1:1. 

 

No creator is needed, thank you very much!

 

I'd be happy to explain what I mean here SD4M, but only if you retract your reply to WarriorPoet, in post #63 of the thread Florduh locked.  (You can do the retraction here or elsewhere... but we don't talk unless you do it.)

 

Just as a reminder, here's part of my reply to you, from that thread.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your information and understanding of what you're presenting here [Einstein's Cosmological Constant theory] aren't just seriously compromised - they're flat-out wrong!

Check out the facts here... http://en.wikipedia....ogical_constant

Now, if you come clean and admit that you're wrong and misinformed, I'll be happy to discuss creatio ex nihilo, the current state of cosmology and the Big bang with you.  That's my price and it's non-negotiable.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I'll show you how the Bible fails at Genesis 1:1 (invalidating everything after it, including the Gospels) after you admit your errors and retract them.

 

Over to you,

 

BAA

 

Regardless of what SD4M does, I would be interested in your thoughts on Genesis 1:1. I know it is wrong because it postulates a god and omits the billions of years between the creation of the universe and the creation of the earth. But what are your thoughts on it? Feel free to PM me if you want. Thanks.

[par4dcourse]

If jesus isn't real who keeps showing up in grilled cheese's and potato chips?

 

Checkmate atheists!

[bornagainathiest]

 

Both scriptural and secular evidence for Jesus are irrelevant if the Bible itself fails at Genesis 1:1. 

 

No creator is needed, thank you very much!

 

I'd be happy to explain what I mean here SD4M, but only if you retract your reply to WarriorPoet, in post #63 of the thread Florduh locked.  (You can do the retraction here or elsewhere... but we don't talk unless you do it.)

 

Just as a reminder, here's part of my reply to you, from that thread.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your information and understanding of what you're presenting here [Einstein's Cosmological Constant theory] aren't just seriously compromised - they're flat-out wrong!

Check out the facts here... http://en.wikipedia....ogical_constant

Now, if you come clean and admit that you're wrong and misinformed, I'll be happy to discuss creatio ex nihilo, the current state of cosmology and the Big bang with you.  That's my price and it's non-negotiable.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I'll show you how the Bible fails at Genesis 1:1 (invalidating everything after it, including the Gospels) after you admit your errors and retract them.

 

Over to you,

 

BAA

 

Regardless of what SD4M does, I would be interested in your thoughts on Genesis 1:1. I know it is wrong because it postulates a god and omits the billions of years between the creation of the universe and the creation of the earth. But what are your thoughts on it? Feel free to PM me if you want. Thanks.

 

 

Sure thing, Brother J.

 

That'll be some time in the coming week, ok?

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

 

 

 

 

p.s.

SD4M, if you want in on this, you know what you have to do!

[miekko]

Both scriptural and secular evidence for Jesus are irrelevant if the Bible itself fails at Genesis 1:1. 

 

Depends entirely on the kind of question you're asking! If you're asking "how did christianity begin?" and the hypothesis you are investigating is 'it sprung up around the teachings of a preacher whose life by and large correlates in some way to the gospel stories', the evidence (or lack thereof) is very important. It's not like everyone who presents evidence for the historicity of a Jesusoid man believe in god! 

[WarriorPoet]

BAA, I actually appreciated SD4M's post.  Despite the fact that he was dead wrong, he brought up a subject that I was not familiar with.  I had an opportunity to educate myself on a new topic, which I enthusiastically did.  By the time I had found out enough to be confident to reply to him, you had already done an excellent job and I just let it go.

 

It's a nice feeling when someone has your back, and I appreciate you setting our "friend"  straight.  He should retract what he said because he was woefully incorrect. 

 

And now for the almost on topic part of my post, I would be very interested in your Gen 1:1 info as well, if you don't mind.  Hope to hear from you, and SD4M soon.

[Brother Jeff]

 

 

Both scriptural and secular evidence for Jesus are irrelevant if the Bible itself fails at Genesis 1:1. 

 

No creator is needed, thank you very much!

 

I'd be happy to explain what I mean here SD4M, but only if you retract your reply to WarriorPoet, in post #63 of the thread Florduh locked.  (You can do the retraction here or elsewhere... but we don't talk unless you do it.)

 

Just as a reminder, here's part of my reply to you, from that thread.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your information and understanding of what you're presenting here [Einstein's Cosmological Constant theory] aren't just seriously compromised - they're flat-out wrong!

Check out the facts here... http://en.wikipedia....ogical_constant

Now, if you come clean and admit that you're wrong and misinformed, I'll be happy to discuss creatio ex nihilo, the current state of cosmology and the Big bang with you.  That's my price and it's non-negotiable.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I'll show you how the Bible fails at Genesis 1:1 (invalidating everything after it, including the Gospels) after you admit your errors and retract them.

 

Over to you,

 

BAA

 

Regardless of what SD4M does, I would be interested in your thoughts on Genesis 1:1. I know it is wrong because it postulates a god and omits the billions of years between the creation of the universe and the creation of the earth. But what are your thoughts on it? Feel free to PM me if you want. Thanks.

 

 

Sure thing, Brother J.

 

That'll be some time in the coming week, ok?

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

 

 

 

 

p.s.

SD4M, if you want in on this, you know what you have to do!

 

 

Looking forward to it! Glory!

 

Will you post it here or in a separate thread or in a PM? I don't want to miss it!

[3DollarBill]

Hi again sandiego...I see you haven't given up yet.

I'll begin this argument by conceding.  You're right.  Jesus existed.  Now that we have that settled...how about you go ahead and prove he was anything more than a deranged rabbi whose radical theological teachings earned him a small cult following and eventually got him executed.

 

See here's the thing...and I know this is hard for you christards to wrap your heads around...but it makes no difference to me whether Jesus existed.  If he didn't, he didn't, and if he did, he still wasn't a god.

[RipVanWinkle]

sandiego4me: How do you suppose Jesus' historical references compare to someone who really existed, like Caesar? bill

[slave2six]

I don't recall issuing the challenge.

 

The moniker is because I have a wife and five daughters, hence the slave bit.

[slave2six]

 

1. The Numbers.   Throughout history, there have literally been billions of people who have identified themselves as Christians. 

 

2. Writings About Jesus.  Writings about Jesus came into existence within 50 years of his existence and continue down to today.

 

3. Non-Christian References to Jesus.  Here are just a few secular historians that referenced Jesus:

 

a. Tacitus (AD 55-120) was a Roman historian.  He has been called “the greatest historian” of ancient Rome  Tacitus made several references to Christians and Christ....

 

 

1. There are also billions of Hindus. Does this make the Hindu god real? There are billions of Buddhists. Does that impact the veracity of any other religions? No.

 

2. "Writings about Jesus came into existence within 50 years of his existence and continue down to today." - This has been a really important issue for me.

 

There is overwhelming scientific data concerning the phenomena of eyewitness accounts, one of the fundamentals of which is that the longer a time expires between an event and the documentation of the event, the more unreliable the evidence is. In most cases, once you have passed a 24 hour period, the credibility of the event begins to corrupt. After a month, whatever is said is more fiction than fact. 

 

If god was really even slightly intelligent, he would have had someone (or more than one person) writing down everything Jesus said and did at the times of those events. Short of that, the reliability of the statements about the events falls off sharply. And the more those twelve talked about the events, the more polluted the stories become. 

 

3. Tacitus etc. - of course he/they would make reference to Christians and Christ since the religion had been established. Did Tacitus ever cite references such as a record of Pilat's orders for the execution of Christ? Nope. So, everything that was written about Christ by anyone who never saw him and never saw unbiased documentation (birth certificates, records from the census, death records, etc) is hearsay, plain and simple.

 

Does that mean there was not a person named Jesus in Israel at that time. No. But there is no reliable evidence of what he actually said or did. Ideally, the Gospels should have been penned while this person was living. Had they been written a year after the events, they would be a lot more reliable. I'm nearly fifty years old. If you were to ask me to remember a sermon that was given by Pastor Dan 30 years ago, how reliable do you think my memory would be? ("Oh, but Pastor Dan is not the Son of God. If you had heard the words of the Son of God, you would not forget them." - If he was the son of god, he'd be smart enough to hire a scribe, IMHO.)

 

The only thing that is important about this Jesus person is the mythology that surrounds him. There is absolutely no reliable evidence that he ever performed a miracle or said he was god or went about arbitrarily forgiving people. It makes for a nice tale but it cannot rise to the level of historical fact.

[slave2six]

If jesus isn't real who keeps showing up in grilled cheese's and potato chips?

 

Checkmate atheists!

 

LMAO!

[HymenaeusAlexander]

If jesus isn't real who keeps showing up in grilled cheese's and potato chips?

 

Checkmate atheists!

 

You think that's Jesus?

 

Yeah, well, that's just like, your opinion, man. The Dude abides.

[WarriorPoet]

 

If jesus isn't real who keeps showing up in grilled cheese's and potato chips?

 

Checkmate atheists!

 

You think that's Jesus?

 

Yeah, well, that's just like, your opinion, man. The Dude abides.

 

HA, you're both wrong.  It's totally Mohammed.

[slave2six]

Where did SD4M go? He posted the OP for me and has not returned.

 

Trolling again?

[MerryG]

Where did SD4M go? He posted the OP for me and has not returned.

 

Trolling again?

 

Isn't that interesting? SD4M is doing what they all do -- running for the hills, changing the subject, and quoting C.S. Lewis in a shiny new thread rather than rising to the elementary challenge of continuing the discussion he started here.

[Thurisaz]

Then of course none of them are really interested in discussion. They do what good slaves do - spread what the führer told them.

[Ravenstar]

Every single christian should watch the Judgment at Nuremburg... it's an amazing example of personal responsibility, and also unthinking obedience to authority leading to atrocity. Unfortunately I don't think they would be able to apply it to themselves.

 

But... Burt Lancaster!  and Spencer Tracey!

[Thurisaz]

Yeah they would not need more than a second to safely fit it all into their "ah the nazi athiests™" crap worldview.

[bornagainathiest]

To Brother Jeff and the WarriorPoet...

 

If I post here or in a new thread anywhere else in Ex-C, there's always the possibility that a certain 7-11 will just barge right on in. 

Excluding him from any thread isn't an option and even if we just ignore him, he'd still be gaining access to information I said I'd only share with him if he retracted his post about Einstein's Cosmic Crapola theory.

 

Nope! 

 

If it's ok with you guys I'll go via PM, copying you both in so that we're all on the same page.  Likewise, if you could match me and copy your input to the other two, that'd be v.helpful.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

To punt the ball into play, please mull these questions over and also take a look at the links I'll be PM'ing you asap.

(It's ok, this won't make much sense to whasisname, unless he sees the links I'll be sending you - which he wont.  )

 

Two sailors, Bob and Jim, are on their yachts - one in the Atlantic and one in the Pacific.

They are hundreds and hundreds of miles from the nearest land or island.  All they can see is the sky above them and water, extending to their respective horizons.  Now, please consider these questions.

 

1.

Is Bob's horizon literally the edge of his world, which he could sail right off or is it just a visual effect of the curvature of the Earth, with the Atlantic carrying on beyond the limits he can see?

2.

Same question, but applied to Jim, in the Pacific.

3.

Allowing for time zone differences and the weather, if Bob and Jim could instantly swap places, would they notice anything significantly different in their 'new' locations?

 

Thanks,

 

BAA

 

 

 

[sdelsolray]

Well, they would notice a difference in the night sky.  The stars would be different.

[bornagainathiest]

Well, they would notice a difference in the night sky.  The stars would be different.

 

Agree.

 

But then for both Bob and Jim to see stars, they'd have to be in parts of the Atlantic and Pacific oceans that were both on the night side of the Earth.

 

My bad for not making this as clear as I should have.  I'd hoped that by writing, "Allowing for time zone differences..." the possibility you've highlighted would have been taken into account.

 

Anyway, thanks for the input, Sdelsolray.  You're keeping me honest and that's no bad thing.

 

BAA

[chrisstavrous]

Sandiego4me, next time you go to a robin hood movie and think wow this really happened, know that what you are watching is based on one letter that mentioned him and the rest of it is all based on folklore.

 

It really does not take much to make up a story.