Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: August 11, 2022, 5:49 pm

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Historical Accuracy of Christ
#1
Historical Accuracy of Christ
I whent away and did some reserch. I will probably add more later. I have tried to approach from bothe angles.

FOR

-The Gospels and other early Christian writings.
pro-Some of these writings are very close to the time of Christ, some authors even living through it, and there sheer quantity may indicate some historical truth (or a very large conspiricy).
con-can be expected to be incredibly bais hence, as stand alone evidence, almost useless.

-Josephus
pro-a devout Jew (at least at the time of writing) hence had no reason to write for the history of Christ (indeed, exactly the opposite) hence can be considered more reliable than the Gospels. Shown by refrence to Christ as 'SO-CALLED Christ' which indicates imparsiality.
con-we'll get to that latter.

-Tacitus
pro-anti-christian hence can be more reliable in recording history of Christ than Christians (in a way)
-Writings such as 'The first-century Roman Tacitus, who is considered one of the more accurate historians of the ancient world, mentioned superstitious "Christians " ("named after Christus" which is Latin for Christ), who suffered under Pontius Pilate during the reign of Tiberius. Suetonius, chief secretary to Emperor Hadrian, wrote that there was a man named Chrestus (or Christ) who lived during the first century (Annals 15.44 ).The lanuge in this and other writings suggests that it has not been tampered with-too negitive.

-Other Roman chroniclers such as Lucian ect
Same as above.

AGAINST

-Josephus fake
pro-Early Church Fathers do not mention these lines which suggests they did not exist at the time.
-the lack of quantity about such a large topic suggests a copy and paste exercise.
con-ECF debating divinity of Christ, not existence, hence had no need of the historian Josephus.
-Origin makes a breif mention of the work (although doubt is placed on the authenticity)
-Josephus was a devote Jew hence did not belive than Jesus was the Christ ('So-called Chist'). This means the figure would have been relitivly unimportant to him.
-There are no copies which ommit the extract which suggests it was in place in the original (or pretty close anyway).
-The qestion is raised about who forged the extract and for what purpose.

-No DNA or primary accounts
pro-second hand accounts only get us so far.
con-Israel is one of the most volitile areas on earth, in the last 2,000 years who knows what could have been lost.
Reply
#2
RE: Historical Accuracy of Christ
I doubt there are still many people who think Jesus never existed. The real question is why only one account of the "resurrection" was taken, and was only written down properly over 60 years after the guy died.
Reply
#3
RE: Historical Accuracy of Christ
Adrian I am one of the few atheists that believes that Jesus was a fictional character.There are at least three accounts of the resurrection and they all contradict each other badly.What I get tired of stating is that the Jesus myth is nothing more than a mish mash of plagiarized myths that predated christianity.Also,I dare say all of the sayings attributed to Jesus are hearsay since he did not write one word in the NT.This topic is old and it's a shame that alot of atheists have neglected it for so long.A careful study and perusal of the scriptures and all secular writings of the time will show that Jesus never existed as an actual man who walked the earth.

Also, it might do you some good to do some comparative religious studies regarding the Jesus myth.You will see that this pathetic myth has been told before in so many different religions and cultures and also you will discover that Christianity is rife with pagan mythology and ritualistic practices.
There is nothing people will not maintain when they are slaves to superstition

http://chatpilot-godisamyth.blogspot.com/

Reply
#4
RE: Historical Accuracy of Christ
After reading "The God Who Wasn't There" I have SERIOUS doubts about the existance of the historical man.

At best I think the Gospel records of the man are so distorted and compromised as to make the man and what he actually said and did irrelevant.
'How can you say, "We are wise, for we have the law of the LORD," when actually the lying pen of the scribes has handled it falsely? Jer 8:8
A child of five would understand this. Send someone to fetch a child of five. Groucho Marx
Reply
#5
RE: Historical Accuracy of Christ
My evidence is taken on the assumption that Christs powers were over-rated and that he was a cult figure, if that. To begin to argue over the divinity of Christ, I would have to re-structure my evidence.
Please could any posts be geared toward arguing for or against Christ existing as a man and largly ignore the miricles as I think it is beside the point of the evidence I have provided.
Reply
#6
RE: Historical Accuracy of Christ
IMO Jesus PROBABLY existed...and IF he did...he was certainly grotesquely exaggerated and Jesus Christ might not have even been his name!

Jesus was PROBABLY just some nice bloke that people liked and helped a lot of people - like Gandhi maybe - and the writers of the NT grotesquely exaggerated him and turned him into a fictional character who was supposed to be the Messiah.

Maybe something like that happened.
Reply
#7
RE: Historical Accuracy of Christ
dagda my argument is geared towards an historical Christ minus the miracles,either way you look at it an honest study of the subject would lead you to the same conclusion;that he did not exist.Of course you cant rule at that then as today there were many running around claiming divinity and starting cults and sects of thier own that is a phenomenon that has never changed.What makes the Jesus cult any different from the others despite that fact that it has persevered for so long?
There is nothing people will not maintain when they are slaves to superstition

http://chatpilot-godisamyth.blogspot.com/

Reply
#8
RE: Historical Accuracy of Christ
Yes you CERTAINLY CAN NOT prove that jesus existed.. BUT...BUT!

You can't disprove Jesus either....disproving is probably even harder than proving....whatever you're disproving
Reply
#9
RE: Historical Accuracy of Christ
(October 1, 2008 at 2:08 pm)chatpilot Wrote: dagda my argument is geared towards an historical Christ minus the miracles,either way you look at it an honest study of the subject would lead you to the same conclusion;that he did not exist.Of course you cant rule at that then as today there were many running around claiming divinity and starting cults and sects of thier own that is a phenomenon that has never changed.What makes the Jesus cult any different from the others despite that fact that it has persevered for so long?

You have contradicted yourself here. First you say Jesus did not exist and then say he was like everyone else claiming divinity. Which one is it? Normal man with big asparations or fictional character? Ether way, please say why you think in that direction.
Reply
#10
RE: Historical Accuracy of Christ
I dont see the contradiction,I simply stated that if he did exist which he did not he would not have been any different from the many other cult leaders of that time period.The reason I feel he did not exist is because the scriptures are so contradictory to one another that it is an insult to any intelligent mans mind to believe them.Secondly, they are not original or first hand accounts of what supposedly took place.The manner in which they were selected by the council on which books were inspired and which were not is also faulty.And like I have said many times the Jesus myth has been told before in many cultures and religious sects that predated Christianity by many years.

Just so that you don't go misunderstanding me again,Jesus is a fictional character drawn from pagan myths and religious beliefs and never existed as an actual living breathing person in the history of this Earth.I can't make it any clearer than that.
There is nothing people will not maintain when they are slaves to superstition

http://chatpilot-godisamyth.blogspot.com/

Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Famous quotes of historical republicans..... Brian37 11 1129 November 20, 2016 at 3:22 pm
Last Post: Brian37
  Holocost denial for dummies. Was: [split] Do you think jesus christ existed paintpooper 55 8259 January 5, 2014 at 1:58 am
Last Post: Aractus
  Nelson Mandela and historical revisionism. I and I 17 6780 December 7, 2013 at 6:56 pm
Last Post: I and I
  The Bible and Historical Documents Deckard 11 2072 September 25, 2013 at 6:00 pm
Last Post: Minimalist
  A historical perspective: Dubya was a complete failure TaraJo 30 9994 December 5, 2012 at 1:42 am
Last Post: TaraJo
  Favourite Dictators/Historical Leaders Napoléon 51 17151 June 14, 2012 at 4:43 am
Last Post: rajsharma
  Animated Historical Maps Dean-o 5 1854 June 2, 2011 at 2:51 am
Last Post: Shell B
  The Historical Christ dagda 104 23936 August 5, 2009 at 4:59 pm
Last Post: Minimalist



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)