Survival

Ingledsva said:

Tacitus was 2nd century AD. He talks about Christians and says Christus was their leader. He is writing from hearsay.

Click to expand...

KenS said:

Your statement is hearsay. Tacitus lived from AD 56 – 117 and therefore would be more privy to what was happening. Because of having lived well within the years of the Apostles and assuming you are versed enough in this to know this fact, one can only come to the conclusion that you don't agree because you don't believe and not because it isn't written.

Click to expand...

Annals was written in A.D.116, and it is hearsay.

Ingledsva said:

Suetonius contemporary to Tacitus does NOT mention Jesus.

Click to expand...

KenS said:

Yes, this would be less valuable and there would be much debated depending on ones viewpoint.

His statement was "As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome." To those who think Jesus Christ is a myth would have their POV. For those who believe that Jesus Christ existed--Chrestus is the Latin version of Christ. Here again, one's position is based on what you believe

Click to expand...

You seem to be missing some info. Christos just means anointed - and there are several know "Christos" before and after the time of Jesus - and YES some were killed, and all had followers.

Ingledsva said:

Mara Bar-Serapion - written somewhere between 73CE - 3rd century CE.
and this sentence is what they are claiming as about Jesus.

"What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise king?"

1. Way after the fact.
2. The Jews executed several of their kings.

As for the Babylonian Talmud - we have torn that apart several times already.

Click to expand...

KenS said:

Out of contempt, Jesus is also called Naggar bar naggar - "the carpenter son of a carpenter", also Ben charsch etaim - "the son of a wood worker."

I think you would be hard pressed to say this didn't refer to Jesus.

Tract Sanhedrin (103a) Psalm XCI, 10: "No plague shall come near thy dwelling," is interpreted also by the following "That thou mayest never have a son or a disciple who will salt his food so much that he destroys his taste in public, like Jesus the Nazarene."

There are multiple such references.

Click to expand...

As pointed out above these have been torn apart multiple time here. Also there is no "J" - just saying. These texts cover a group of people with the same name over a span of time. Their facts do not line up with the gospel story.

KenS said:

But, let's be honest here. You already know of the multiplicity of non-Christian support for Jesus. The question is, "Do I not accept it because of my foundational belief system?"

One would have to say "yes" to that question.

Click to expand...

This is ridiculous. If the events spoken of concerning Iesous actually took place - we would expect there to be multiple documents and letters, info sent between leaders, etc. We have none of these things. Supposedly there was an earthquake and the dead got out of their graves and wandered around, and into the Holy City, at his death. You don't think there would be a few letters and documents if that actually took place? It did NOT take place.

Even if we were to accept all of this questionable after the fact info - we would still only have a normal human that was executed for insurrection.

And just for your info - I was raised Christian. I found it to be false after studying Comparative Religions, and the religions of Abraham in particular.

PS. What is that Sanhedrin reference again? 103a does not have that.

I decided to add this CHRISTIAN site which quotes these verses they say are about Iesous. New Page 4

Read what they claim - and then read the actual verse - they say nothing about Iesous.

*
I forgot to ask - where is the "Naggar bar Naggar? Did you know that this word is associated with Sorcerer?
*

Ingledsva said:

Tacitus was 2nd century AD. He talks about Christians and says Christus was their leader. He is writing from hearsay.

Click to expand...

Call_of_the_Wild said:

Ok and historians that write about Lincoln being assasinated in Ford's theatre are also writing from hearsay. Point?

Click to expand...

Good grief! Do you know how ridiculous that sounds?

Later Lincoln historians are using multiple first hand accounts of people in the theater, the doctor's report, coroner's reports, pictures, news articles, stories of Booth's capture, pictures of Booth dead, etc.

We even have his death mask and pictures of the special train which carried his body for burial. The train made many stops so people could view him "in state."

*

Call_of_the_wild said:

Ok and historians that write about Lincoln being assasinated in Ford's theatre are also writing from hearsay. Point?

Click to expand...

KenS said:

Game, set, match. :thud:

Click to expand...

Good grief you guys! I suggest you read my answer to him. LOL!

*

Also there is no "J" - just saying. These texts cover a group of people with the same name over a span of time. Their facts do not line up with the gospel story.

Click to expand...

For the record, there's really no way of knowing whether the "Yeshu" is NOT the same Jesus, just as one cannot necessarily make the leap and say that they're the same as if matter of fact, though I personally believe there's plenty of reason to assume so judging by the extremely venemous tone, you rarely see that kind of vitriol.

Just because the Talmud mentions things that aren't in the Gospel accounts doesn't mean it doesn't match up with them. There are things mentioned in Acts such as sayings of Jesus that are not found in the Gospel accounts either. It's simply wrong to assume that every single detail is contained in the gospels. If anything, the episode of the over-salting to make a statement can be easily interpreted as in the character of the same Yeshu who made other kinds of statements to the Pharisees and Sadducees in the accounts.

InChrist said:

If as the biblical scriptures say Jesus will return to judge sin and evil on the earth who will be able to survive?


And the kings of the earth, the great men, the rich men, the commanders,the mighty men, every slave and every free man, hid themselves in the caves and in the rocks of the mountains, and said to the mountains and rocks, “Fall on us and hide us from the face of Him who sits on the throne and from the wrath of the Lamb! For the great day of His wrath has come, and who is able to stand?” Revelation 6:15-17

Click to expand...

The same book reports something of an iron rod.
Shall I proceed?

Call_of_the_Wild said:

Not so fast. First off, I am basing Pascal's Wager on the soundness of the argument based on the historicity of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ. As long as the event is historical (which it is), then I have reasons for concluding that Jesus Christ is who he said he is, and therefore Christianity is true alone with the doctrine that goes along with it.

Click to expand...

How is the historicity of Jesus in any way tied to the claims of miracles about him? I mean I believe George Washington existed, but I don't believe he chopped down a cherry tree, or that he never told a lie. The historicity of an individual is not a confirmation of the outlandish claims presented by it. And as I've said before, no amount of textual evidence would be enough to confirm a miracle. We can only use text to confirm certain events, but miracles cannot be confirmed by text a lone; particularly religious texts, which have a bias toward the subject matter.

And Pascal's wager is fallacious, because it assumes a few things. First, that belief is based on the will, that somebody can choose or not choose to believe. And that's wrong, we do not choose to believe, we believe because we've been convinced for various reasons. It also presumes that christianity is the only religion that has fire and brimstone, this is also false. What if you die and find out that Islam was correct? Aren't you in the same position as I am? So, it's not an either or presumption. There are many many religions that are out there or have been presented over time, and not all of them can be right, but they can all be wrong, and until demonstrated otherwise that's the only rational position one should take.

Call_of_the_Wild said:

Well, that is your opinion. The bible says that nature alone is sufficient enough to draw the conclusion that God exists (Romans 1:20).

Click to expand...

And spider man said, "with great power comes great responsibility." Why would you quote the bible to confirm the bible? Have you demonstrated that the bible is an accurate source to be making claims about a deity?

Ingledsva said:

Good grief! Do you know how ridiculous that sounds?

Later Lincoln historians are using multiple first hand accounts of people in the theater, the doctor's report, coroner's reports, pictures, news articles, stories of Booth's capture, pictures of Booth dead, etc.

We even have his death mask and pictures of the special train which carried his body for burial. The train made many stops so people could view him "in state."

*

Click to expand...

Those people could be lying though. The fact of the matter is, YOU WEREN'T there, all you know is what someone told you...and we have first hand accounts of the Ressurection too, from James, Paul, Matthew, Peter, and John.

Call_of_the_Wild said:

Those people could be lying though. The fact of the matter is, YOU WEREN'T there, all you know is what someone told you...and we have first hand accounts of the Ressurection too, from James, Paul, Matthew, Peter, and John.

Click to expand...

And if new evidence arises to dispute that, history will have to adjust accordingly at least we would hope so.

For instance

The 5 Most Ridiculous Lies You Were Taught In History Class | Cracked.com

5 Fictional Stories You Were Taught in History Class | Cracked.com

History is an odd subject to study and at best what we can do is piece together the past. Humans have a notoriously bad memories and can create pattern associations out of thin air (I can't stare at rugs without seeing facial patterns in them smh).

People can be mislead (especially the general public), so it's up to us to continously research our evidence. Unless you were there you can never truly know, that's an unfortunate fact, however you can build correlations (not causation), between events.

Call_of_the_Wild said:

Those people could be lying though. The fact of the matter is, YOU WEREN'T there, all you know is what someone told you...and we have first hand accounts of the Ressurection too, from James, Paul, Matthew, Peter, and John.

Click to expand...

You don't have to be somewhere to establish that certain events took place. You need reasonable evidence for the claim. That being said, not all claims are created equal. The claim that Lincoln was shot in Ford's theatre, is not on equal footing as the claim that a man named Jesus was a god or the son of a god and performed miracles. Those two claims are not even in the same ball park. It would be like equating a story of a man owning a dog, with a story about a man owning a fire breathing dragon. Each claim requires a standard of evidence, and we can not accept all claims based on the same type of evidence, some claims are going to require much more evidence. That's the nature of being rational.

Ingledsva said:

Annals was written in A.D.116, and it is hearsay.

Click to expand...

Because you say so? So if I write about what happened when I was 25, it is hearsay because it happened decades ago?

Il-logical.

You seem to be missing some info. Christos just means anointed - and there are several know "Christos" before and after the time of Jesus - and YES some were killed, and all had followers.

Click to expand...

OK… let's change the word.

His statement was "As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of anointed, he expelled them from Rome."

No… it doesn't work. Let's try that again…

"As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of the anointed one, he expelled them from Rome." (since they did it to those who were Christians&#8230… yes… flows.

This is ridiculous. If the events spoken of concerning Iesous actually took place - we would expect there to be multiple documents and letters, info sent between leaders, etc. We have none of these things. Supposedly there was an earthquake and the dead got out of their graves and wandered around, and into the Holy City, at his death. You don't think there would be a few letters and documents if that actually took place? It did NOT take place.

Click to expand...

If your position holds true… then Shakespeare never existed.

And your position ignores all the letters of the New Testament.

Even if we were to accept all of this questionable after the fact info - we would still only have a normal human that was executed for insurrection.

And just for your info - I was raised Christian. I found it to be false after studying Comparative Religions, and the religions of Abraham in particular.

Click to expand...

Interesting… I wasn't raised a Christian and I found it to be true and have studied Comparative Religions.

As pointed out above these have been torn apart multiple time here. Also there is no "J" - just saying. These texts cover a group of people with the same name over a span of time. Their facts do not line up with the gospel story.

Click to expand...

Yes, it doesn't match your foundational belief system and therefor it does not line up. Yet, I can read it from my foundational belief system and it matches just fine.

It is and remains on how you approach the subject.

I decided to add this CHRISTIAN site which quotes these verses they say are about Iesous. New Page 4

Read what they claim - and then read the actual verse - they say nothing about Iesous.

Click to expand...

From your quoted author:

Support Our War against the Aliens, Reptilians, Nephilim Giants and all those who have fallen and hate the Most High! They're not just coming in on Planet X, Nibiru, and other HUGE space objects and star ships and star fleets, but they also live in underground cities and assimilate into our societies soul scalping humans and breeding their own hybrids among us. We can stop them! We can destroy and stop the aliens from abducting our people and using us as breeders and/or food! I need your financial support to keep this war going!! It's US vs. THEM

Please send donations to:

Sherry Shriner
P.O. Box 531
Carrollton, Ohio 44615

They ARE EVERYWHERE folks! They dominate our politics, religion and entertainment! We need to cleanse America of their infestation and takeover! Support this ministry now!

Click to expand...

And you want me to accept her POV? Somebody help me please!

I forgot to ask - where is the "Naggar bar Naggar? Did you know that this word is associated with Sorcerer?

Click to expand...

They did say that Jesus had a devil and was of the devil. No doubt they did associate him as a sorcerer

Shermana said:

For the record, there's really no way of knowing whether the "Yeshu" is NOT the same Jesus, just as one cannot necessarily make the leap and say that they're the same as if matter of fact, though I personally believe there's plenty of reason to assume so judging by the extremely venemous tone, you rarely see that kind of vitriol.

Just because the Talmud mentions things that aren't in the Gospel accounts doesn't mean it doesn't match up with them. There are things mentioned in Acts such as sayings of Jesus that are not found in the Gospel accounts either. It's simply wrong to assume that every single detail is contained in the gospels. If anything, the episode of the over-salting to make a statement can be easily interpreted as in the character of the same Yeshu who made other kinds of statements to the Pharisees and Sadducees in the accounts.

Click to expand...

:bow: My respect for you has notched upward. Thank you for a great post. It gives a balanced viewpoint

Ingledsva said:

Annals was written in A.D.116, and it is hearsay.

Click to expand...

KenS said:

Because you say so? So if I write about what happened when I was 25, it is hearsay because it happened decades ago?

Il-logical.

Click to expand...

LOL! Did you forget what you yourself wrote? - born 56AD? He wasn't even born until 56 years after the supposed events! Hearsay!

Ingledsva said:

You seem to be missing some info. Christos just means anointed - and there are several know "Christos" before and after the time of Jesus - and YES some were killed, and all had followers.

Click to expand...

KenS said:

OK… let's change the word.

His statement was "As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of anointed, he expelled them from Rome."

No… it doesn't work. Let's try that again…

"As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of the anointed one, he expelled them from Rome." (since they did it to those who were Christians…)… yes… flows.

Click to expand...

Doesn't matter how you work it. There were other groups related to a Christos - including the followers of Mithras - who was also called Christos - as per church documents.

Ingledsva said:

This is ridiculous. If the events spoken of concerning Iesous actually took place - we would expect there to be multiple documents and letters, info sent between leaders, etc. We have none of these things. Supposedly there was an earthquake and the dead got out of their graves and wandered around, and into the Holy City, at his death. You don't think there would be a few letters and documents if that actually took place? It did NOT take place.

Click to expand...

KenS said:

If your position holds true… then Shakespeare never existed.

And your position ignores all the letters of the New Testament.

Click to expand...

We have all kinds of legal documents for Shakespeare. He is a listed landowner, became a High Bailiff, we even know the names of his twins, etc. The only thing questioned is whether he actually wrote "his works," or fronted someone else.

The letters were written after the fact - and only the latest one adds the dead rising crap. None of the others do.

Ingledsva said:

Even if we were to accept all of this questionable after the fact info - we would still only have a normal human that was executed for insurrection.

And just for your info - I was raised Christian. I found it to be false after studying Comparative Religions, and the religions of Abraham in particular.

Click to expand...

KenS said:

Interesting… I wasn't raised a Christian and I found it to be true and have studied Comparative Religions.

Click to expand...

You have chosen to believe on faith - as there are no facts.

Ingledsva said:

As pointed out above these have been torn apart multiple time here. Also there is no "J" - just saying. These texts cover a group of people with the same name over a span of time. Their facts do not line up with the gospel story.

Click to expand...

KenS said:

Yes, it doesn't match your foundational belief system and therefor it does not line up. Yet, I can read it from my foundational belief system and it matches just fine.

It is and remains on how you approach the subject.

Click to expand...

No, they just don't have enough info to prove your ideas.

Ingledsva said:

I decided to add this CHRISTIAN site which quotes these verses they say are about Iesous. New Page 4

Read what they claim - and then read the actual verse - they say nothing about Iesous.

Click to expand...

KenS said:

From your quoted author:


And you want me to accept her POV? Somebody help me please!

Click to expand...

LOL! Boy did you get that one backward! I don't want you to believe the page. I am using their page of verses to show the verses (ones that you folks are using) ARE WRONG; and do not say what you want them to say!

I said it was a Christian site - IT IS.

Why did I give this site? Because it has a couple pages of the verses YOU FOLKS ARE CLAIMING ARE ABOUT JESUS, - all on one site for folks to read.

Read what this Christian group says about the verses proving Jesus - then read the actual verses - which are quoted - to see how bogus these Christian claims are.

Ingledsva said:

I forgot to ask - where is the "Naggar bar Naggar? Did you know that this word is associated with Sorcerer?

Click to expand...

KenS said:

They did say that Jesus had a devil and was of the devil. No doubt they did associate him as a sorcerer

Click to expand...

I asked for the info because I am interested in this title. I would like to look it up and read the surrounding information.

*

Ingledsva said:

Good grief! Do you know how ridiculous that sounds?

Later Lincoln historians are using multiple first hand accounts of people in the theater, the doctor's report, coroner's reports, pictures, news articles, stories of Booth's capture, pictures of Booth dead, etc.

We even have his death mask and pictures of the special train which carried his body for burial. The train made many stops so people could view him "in state."

Click to expand...

Call_of_the_Wild said:

Those people could be lying though. The fact of the matter is, YOU WEREN'T there, all you know is what someone told you...and we have first hand accounts of the Ressurection too, from James, Paul, Matthew, Peter, and John.

Click to expand...

Not going to fly!

We have thousands of documents for Lincoln (and many pictures,) cross documenting his existence.

This is not true for Jesus - and you need to stop trying to throw in regular people existing - against your god-man existing.

You would have to use other Sons of God and mortal women - such as Hephaistos, - and you know very few (including YOU) are going to believe in them either.

*

outhouse said:

He didn't know Jesus

But his 7 attributed letters are important to understand how the theology was developing early on.

BTW hearsay is very important evidence, and almost always allowed in a courtroom due to its importance. Provided it is set up with the proper exceptions.

Click to expand...

Where? I just got off a jury, and the lawyers constantly objected with "hear-say," and the info was struck down and not allowed to be heard.

*

I was hoping someone would catch that.

Call_of_the_Wild said:

Those people could be lying though. The fact of the matter is, YOU WEREN'T there, all you know is what someone told you...and we have first hand accounts of the Ressurection too, from James, Paul, Matthew, Peter, and John.

Click to expand...

Truly, you need to research and study outside of the New Testament...Biblical scholars and historians will prove to you that there were no disciples and that the names were made up..There were dozens of Jesus cults, all with different beliefs and understandings of what they heard about him... They were Jews trying to incorporate these Jesus stories into their own Jewish belief system.....

Juanita said:

Truly, you need to research and study outside of the New Testament...Biblical scholars and historians will prove to you that there were no disciples and that the names were made up..There were dozens of Jesus cults, all with different beliefs and understandings of what they heard about him... They were Jews trying to incorporate these Jesus stories into their own Jewish belief system.....

Click to expand...

No disciples?
Would that include the Carpenter Himself?.....a prophet who then had no following?

Ingledsva said:

Where? I just got off a jury, and the lawyers constantly objected with "hear-say," and the info was struck down and not allowed to be heard.

*

Click to expand...

He was not a good lawyer then. Or is was a blatent attempt no judge will allow


first rule of hearsay is there is always a exception!

The second rule is, see rule number one.

Hearsay in United States law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hearsay is the legal term for testimony in a court proceeding where the witness does not have direct knowledge of the fact asserted, but knows it only from being told by someone.


The hearsay rule is an analytic rule of evidence that defines hearsay and provides for both exceptions and exemptions from that rule.

There is no all-encompassing definition of hearsay in the United States.

Thief said:

No disciples?
Would that include the Carpenter Himself?.....a prophet who then had no following?

Click to expand...

He was not a carpenter

He was a tekton, tekton in that time and place ment displaced handworker doing odd jobs.

Crude feilstone houses, and the people in Nazareth had few possesions, and there was almost no wood there.


AS far as disciples, the NT is almost silent on all but 3, I believe he had his inner circle, Peter, James, John. That makes sense if one is to live off the hospitality of others to survive.

outhouse said:

He was not a good lawyer then. Or is was a blatent attempt no judge will allow


first rule of hearsay is there is always a exception!

The second rule is, see rule number one.

Hearsay in United States law - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hearsay is the legal term for testimony in a court proceeding where the witness does not have direct knowledge of the fact asserted, but knows it only from being told by someone.


The hearsay rule is an analytic rule of evidence that defines hearsay and provides for both exceptions and exemptions from that rule.

There is no all-encompassing definition of hearsay in the United States.

Click to expand...

You need to read the whole article.

"Hearsay is not allowed as evidence in the United States, unless one of about thirty eight exceptions applies to the particular statement being made."

These exceptions are specific such as a police officer stating he heard the victim in a trial call out - "name" please don't shoot me!" before he entered a house and found "name" with a gun.

*