RE: Historian explains why Jesus ''mythers'' aren't taken seriously by most Historians
June 5, 2015 at 4:45 pm
(This post was last modified: June 5, 2015 at 4:45 pm by Minimalist.)
Quote:Nobody is disputing that magical Jesus is bullshit; this is known. The line about Christ's exectuon was not added in the middle ages, (a) passage was altered to reflect the alterer's viewpoint. The middle ages alteration was done by a Christian, who tried to alter the text. However the original references still exist.
Hang around here long enough and you'll find out otherwise.
As far as Tacitus I repeat, we have one manuscript which notes that the group allegedly punished by "Nero" were Chrestians. Tacitus' compatriot Suetonius has already discussed Chrestians and we have archaeological evidence that Chrestians were in Rome long before the godboy.
So when you claim that the original references "still exist" you are indulging in wishful thinking (at best) because we do not have an earlier text but we still have Carrier's (among others) observation that no other writer, xtian or Greco-Roman, makes any reference to this act of Nero.
In fact, the closest we come is in Book II of Chronica by the 5th century writer, Sulpicius Severus....a xtian... who writes:
Quote:In the meantime, the number of the Christians being now very large, it happened that Rome was destroyed by fire, while Nero was stationed at Antium. But the opinion of all cast the odium of causing the fire upon the emperor, and he was believed in this way to have sought for the glory of building a new city. And in fact, Nero could not by any means he tried escape from the charge that the fire had been caused by his orders. He therefore turned the accusation against the Christians, and the most cruel tortures were accordingly inflicted upon the innocent. Nay, even new kinds of death were invented, so that, being covered in the skins of wild beasts, they perished by being devoured by dogs, while many were crucified or slain by fire, and not a few were set apart for this purpose, that, when the day came to a close, they should be consumed to serve for light during the night.
He does not credit "Tacitus" as the source but that could simply be poor form. More important is that the vital quote which you hang your hat on does not appear. At least this narrows down the time frame for when the forgery took place!
