Wednesday, May 16, 2007

Myther Lies Told Offen Enouch

someone calling himself "heyduke" resopnds to the article on the tomb:


What is the evidence for the historic Jesus? What contemporary writer wrote of seeing Jesus, of seeing the crowds who worhipped at his feet, who witnessed the crucifixion?


Evidence for the historical Jesus Is so abundant that I can't briefly summarize it all. But follow the link and you will see there's a ton of it. Just to mention a couple of things:

Papias knew several eye witnesses
Plycarp knew John
Celsus documents Talmudic references to Jesus written in first century. This last one might answer your question in fact.
Good eye wintess evidence in John and Luke (Luke was not an eye witness but he consulted with them)
1 Clement connects the link from Peter to Pual and Clement himself who knew both Peter and Paul
1 John claims to be eye witness
1 Peter claims to be eye witness
45 lost Gsopels many of the from frist century protray Jesus as flesh and blood man in history
Joephus' info was first century




There are no contemporary descriptions, only those written hundreds of years later, based on already exisiting myths of a savior.


No contemporary accounts of Julius Ceasar. Almost all ancient wirtings are a couple hundred years after the event. They didn't have the 6:00 news, they didn't have on the spot reporting. Historians are suppossed to write about the past. it's idiotic to say "no historians mentions Jesus from a contemproary persective" because that's not what histoirans do.


Yes, archaeology does verify things written in the present version of the Bible, things that were written about long after the supposed historic Jesus.



Helmutt Koester shows that the gap for the easliest writting circulating with the passsaion narrative and the empty tomb is from around AD 50. That's 18 year gap. Paul also documents much of the Gsopel story before the tradiational date for any of the Gospels.

2 comments:

daexion said...

Josephus's commentary on Jesus has been suggested to have been an addition at a latter time by the Church during a copying of the histories written by him.

J.L. Hinman said...

read my Josephus pages on Doxa

Doxa=Jesus=Historical-Josephus

the consensus among scholars over the last century is to view the core TF as authentic. Most scholars now see it as a core authentic quote testifying to Jesus existence, with some minor tweeking.