The Historical Jesus [Part 1]

Bruce (from dialogue with Roy Casanova): Exactly what evidence do you have for the extraordinary claim that someone (or something) died on a cross for our "sins"? Just because you believe it doesn't make it so.

AMANDA: The Romans were very good historians with very few of them being Christians. The life of Jesus, including His resurrection - right up to the detail that He was in the tomb for 3 days only - can all be proved by non-Christian historians without looking in the Bible once. You can look up some of them for yourself, such as Flavius Josephus the Jew, Carius Cornelius Tacitus (a Roman who hated Christians), Suetonius, Pliny the Younger and Lucian of Samosata. There is also mention of Jesus in the Antiquities, Book 20, Chapter 9, Section 1 (just to name one place).

BRUCE: I can see I'm going to have an easy time here, Amanda! You clearly have not done much research in this area, since you make the same silly mistakes that all Christian apologists do while trying to contort the facts to their liking as a means to arriving at a preformed conclusion. This is probably because you don't really have a clue what you're talking about here; rather you are just parroting what you've been reading in Josh McDowell and other Christian apologetical works.

To begin with, the question of whether or not the Jesus of the gospels existed (a big "if" in it's own right), and whether such a person, if he did exist, was "God," or claimed to be God, or did any of the miraculous things he is made to do in the Christian scriptures, are two entirely different questions that must be dealt with separately. You understand, don't you, that even if Jesus could be proven to be an historical person, that would in no way prove that he was God or that he said or performed any of the sayings or miracles attributed to him!

Also to be dealt with independently are the questions of exactly who, what, when and in what context extra biblical writings are alleged to refer to certain people or terms that Christian apologists today want to identify with their man, Jesus, and all too often do, albeit under less than honest circumstances. Most of their "evidence," in fact, is neither contemporary nor even applicable to their man in place, time or event, yet that certainly doesn't prevent them from leading the "believing" flocks into thinking there is "abundant" extrabiblical evidence in support of an historical Jesus (the man), let alone Jesus (the archetypical mythic hero) of the gospels. But I guess lying is okay for Christians, so long as the end result is more sheep being brought into the fold!

So, where would you like to start, Amanda? How about with contemporary historians of the day who were present and recording events during the same time period all of the miraculous events we read about in the gospels were allegedly being performed by Jesus? I propose we begin with Philo and Justus of Tiberias. Is that ok with you? Or, if it pleases you, we can go directly to the non-contemporary and in most cases, suspect, accounts that appear in Josephus, Tacitus and Seutonius. I especially like what Celsus has to say, though you no doubt will not! From there we can move on to the Jewish Talmud which, contrary to Christian assertions today, actually works against them! But we can get into all of this in due course...

I will be delighted to debate you on this point as long as you like, Amanda (with your Josh McDowell at your side to copy your answers from--all the easier for me); it is a topic I am quite familiar with, mainly because I so often receive cocky emails from people like yourself who presume to be "knowledgeable True Christians(TM)" who are going to show the misguided atheist the "error of his ways."

Bruce Monson

www.freethoughtfirefighters.org

Adherence to Life BEFORE Death

	*The Historical Jesus*	Home

	*Bruce* (from dialogue with Roy Casanova): Exactly what evidence do you have for the extraordinary claim that someone (or something) died on a cross for our "sins"? Just because you believe it doesn't make it so. AMANDA: The Romans were very good historians with very few of them being Christians. The life of Jesus, including His resurrection - right up to the detail that He was in the tomb for 3 days only - can all be proved by non-Christian historians without looking in the Bible once. You can look up some of them for yourself, such as Flavius Josephus the Jew, Carius Cornelius Tacitus (a Roman who hated Christians), Suetonius, Pliny the Younger and Lucian of Samosata. There is also mention of Jesus in the Antiquities, Book 20, Chapter 9, Section 1 (just to name one place). BRUCE: I can see I'm going to have an easy time here, Amanda! You clearly have not done much research in this area, since you make the same silly mistakes that all Christian apologists do while trying to contort the facts to their liking as a means to arriving at a preformed conclusion. This is probably because you don't really have a clue what you're talking about here; rather you are just parroting what you've been reading in Josh McDowell and other Christian apologetical works. To begin with, the question of whether or not the Jesus of the gospels existed (a big "if" in it's own right), and whether such a person, if he did exist, was "God," or claimed to be God, or did any of the miraculous things he is made to do in the Christian scriptures, are two entirely different questions that must be dealt with separately. You understand, don't you, that even if Jesus could be proven to be an historical person, that would in no way prove that he was God or that he said or performed any of the sayings or miracles attributed to him! Also to be dealt with independently are the questions of exactly who, what, when and in what context extra biblical writings are alleged to refer to certain people or terms that Christian apologists today want to identify with their man, Jesus, and all too often do, albeit under less than honest circumstances. Most of their "evidence," in fact, is neither contemporary nor even applicable to their man in place, time or event, yet that certainly doesn't prevent them from leading the "believing" flocks into thinking there is "abundant" extrabiblical evidence in support of an historical Jesus (the man), let alone Jesus (the archetypical mythic hero) of the gospels. But I guess lying is okay for Christians, so long as the end result is more sheep being brought into the fold! So, where would you like to start, Amanda? How about with contemporary historians of the day who were present and recording events during the same time period all of the miraculous events we read about in the gospels were allegedly being performed by Jesus? I propose we begin with Philo and Justus of Tiberias. Is that ok with you? Or, if it pleases you, we can go directly to the non-contemporary and in most cases, suspect, accounts that appear in Josephus, Tacitus and Seutonius. I especially like what Celsus has to say, though you no doubt will not! From there we can move on to the Jewish Talmud which, contrary to Christian assertions today, actually works against them! But we can get into all of this in due course... I will be delighted to debate you on this point as long as you like, Amanda (with your Josh McDowell at your side to copy your answers from--all the easier for me); it is a topic I am quite familiar with, mainly because I so often receive cocky emails from people like yourself who presume to be "knowledgeable True Christians(TM)" who are going to show the misguided atheist the "error of his ways." Bruce Monson www.freethoughtfirefighters.org Adherence to Life BEFORE Death