(April 26, 2014 at 3:50 pm)Lek Wrote:(April 26, 2014 at 2:54 pm)BlackSwordsman Wrote: No worries, you do not have to wonder whom killed Jesus because he never existed in the first place, therefor was never killed by the Romans. So I guess everything that happened based on him never existing would have happened anyway. But to interject one more bit of information on the subject, let's assume he was killed by the Romans, the only difference would be the amount of actual non-biblical references to him that are not around today.
Why do you dismiss the writings of the early christian witnesses to Jesus? Peter and John walked with him for three years or so and were witnesses to the trial and crucifixion. What did the biblical writers have to gain by making up this story? Roman historian Tacitus and Jewish historian Josephus also made references to him. It seems that this evidence would at least leave an opening in your mind for the possibility of his existence.
"Peter and John walked with him for three years or so and were witnesses to the trial and crucifixion."
No. Most definitely no.
Most Christians are told that direct witnesses of Jesus’ life wrote the four Gospels. This is undoubtedly not true. The bottom line is: we don’t know for sure who wrote the Gospels, but the authors weren’t the companions of Jesus, and had never met him or anyone who had known him.
One only needs to leaf through any of the Gospels to realize they weren’t written by eyewitnesses, or by anyone who interrogated eyewitnesses. There are no interviews of Jesus, or his disciples, or of any of the characters in the action. Nowhere do we read a phrase such as
“I, Matthew/Mark/Luke/John saw this or heard that” or
“I was present when” this or that happened, or
“I talked to ...who told me... so I asked him...” Everything is written as pure narrative. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tMTNJzRpXs).
Even the conservative Catholic Encyclopedia states,
“It thus appears that the present titles of the Gospels are not trace- able to the Evangelists themselves.” They use the word “evangelist” to avoid “apostle” or “disciple.” They are effectively (and correctly) admitting that the titles of the Gospels - Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, are “not traceable” to Jesus’ apostles. If there was even the slightest bit of good evidence that the Gospel authors knew Jesus, or someone who knew Jesus, the Catholic Encyclopedia would make a big deal of it. They don’t because there isn’t. Yet in nearly every church around the world it’s implied these apostles were the authors.
Most modern preachers aren’t inquisitive or honest enough about the source of the dogma they promote.
