'Apologiz-ing' (1 Pet. 3:15) to Muslims and Islam

[stvdv]

So far, I have been called "liar" and that what I have posted with citation doesn't exist, and that I merely "copy/paste", when in fact, what I have shared is truth, correctly sourced, and manually hand-typed.

Good to know. I also got the feeling there was lots of copy/paste, which even would violate RF rules. But as you manual hand-typed it all, I am really impressed and see that my feeling here was wrong (glad I did not speak it out). You really did a thorough job, I must say.

I admit, I scanned too quickly, sorry. Your first 5 posts seem okay, but personally a little too long for me (but that's fine of course). After post 5 the person I quoted "snapped" at you first, calling you a liar and stuff, I see now. So whatever he got back was "self created karma probably"

 

[stvdv]

Thank you for your time.

Thank you for your friendly reply.

I see you are new on RF, so welcome to RF.

Wish you a good stay here.

 

[stvdv]

Thank you for your time. Feel free to go back over each of the posts and see for yourself, and judge righteous judgment.

I checked a bit more, and I must say, you did quite good. Only 1 little "annoyer" I saw, but I understand, because a Muslim started the "snapping"

In the case of Aishah and the sheep, who can blame her lack of guarding such a [per]verse

 

[firedragon]

Thank you for the very kind offer: I don't know about the author OP, but I'm looking for reliable information/evidence that supports a single authoritative Qur'an. I would appreciate a little guidance. Do you have any recommendations for websites where I can start reading? Thank you in advance.

Brother. In order to answer your question, could you explain a bit what you mean by "a single authoritative Quran"?

 

[Wasp]

"Qu'ran" is in total contradiction to the Bible (KJB). It (Q) is, in fact, antagonistic to Bible (KJB), and to the real Jesus Christ of history, as opposed to the imaginary theological argument "Isa ('Jesus')" of "Q" which never existed at all. According to scripture, Jesus Christ is King of Kings. According to "Q", not so.

Yeah, OK, but what about it? There's hardly anyone who thinks they are the same or that they don't contradict each other. It's hardly an argument.

 

[firedragon]

@Crosstian

brother. I tagged you this way because your posts are way way too long to concentrate on and so far I have seen a large body of text, so let me ask simple questions so that one can have a dialog. You said you have studied 1000 or more pages (if I remember right) of Islamic documents, so you know the subject. Thus, please lets not cut and paste large texts in response to my simple questions that you may analyse and answer directly with your understanding. And certainly not links to a lot of YouTube videos.

One: You have quoted from the answeringislam website, a story about Aisha and the goat eating part of the Quran episode. This was to prove that parts of the Quran was lost. This is just one point.

Do you seriously believe this story happened in real life?

Please dont give links, videos or texts from websites. Give me your personal rationale.

Cheers.

 

[dybmh]

You're welcome
This is a good site as it has introduction and definition of Islam. It has also a search tool in Quran
Introducing Islam to non Muslims - IslamiCity
This site also describes Islam in addition to some scientific verification of Quran verses about universe and nature. Also a brief about prophet Mohamed's life
Islam Guide: A Brief Illustrated Guide to Understanding Islam, Muslims, & the Quran
Regards

Many thanks... I'm just now getting caught up on this thread. Yikes!

 

[shmogie]

So, who was mohammeds father ?

 

[Limo]

Yes, they do exist. I have the books here that I directly quoted from. I gave the links to their material in the OP posts. You have access to the same quotations as I cited there. I lied about nothing, and gave the clean references (see 'Apologiz-ing' (1 Pet. 3:15) to Muslims and Islam ). No imaginary Hadith needed. BTW, I hand typed those from their original source, no copy-pasta needed.

Follow the link - https://d1.islamhouse.com/data/en/ih_books/single/en_Sahih_Al-Bukhari.pdf

PDF page 1381.

What do you say for yourself?

I say to you and to all that you're a liar.
This is fake Sahih Albuckary. Some Christians like you who their hear is full of hatress corrupted a copy of that book.
Here is a link to the correct Sahih A
http://al-islamic.net/hadith/bukhari/78#78

You search in it from beginning to end، you'll not find any of your rabesh.

Liars

 

[Limo]

... continued ...

In Genesis 17:20 KJB, God promises, "And as for Ishmael, I have heard thee: Behold, I have blessed him, and will make him fruitful, and will multiply him exceedingly; twelve princes shall he beget, and I will make him a great nation."

Since this is so, and there were peoples already in the Arabian peninsula, and Ishmael was not yet made "a great nation", he cannot [logically, evidentially] be "the" [singular, definite article] 'Father of the Arab/s', from a Biblical [KJB] perspective. Is he an ancestor to some who were later born in Arabia, and who spoke a form of Arabic dialect? Absolutely, but it does not make him "the" Father of all the people groups in the Arabian peninsula, even though he was to be a "great nation". If I were to say otherwise, that would be overstatment of the facts, from all sources thus searched.

Even beyond this, when Ishmael and his mother, Hagar, were to be "cast out" [Genesis 21:10 KJB] at the behest of Sarah, and confirmed by God [Genesis 21:12 KJB], they first went into the "wilderness of Beersheba" [Genesis 21:14 KJB], which is where Ishmael "grew" and "dwelt" [Genesis 21:20 KJB], and thus "dwelt in the wlderness of Paran" [Genesis 21:21 KJB, see and compare Genesis 14:5-7; Numbers 10:11-13, 12:15-16, 13:1-3,25-27; Deuteronomy 1:1-2, 33:1-2; 1 Samuel 25:1; 1 Kings 11:17-19; Habakkuk 3:3 KJB], his mother, Hagar, taking "him a wife out of the land of Egypt" [Genesis 21:21 KJB], being her native homeland, and closer to that area. Thus the children of Ishmael's first wife, would be 2/3rd's Egyptian, 1/3 Hebrew, and would speak a combination of Egyptian/Canaanite/Chaldean. Neither Arabian blood, nor language even comes into this mixture at this point, though they were to live in the "east country" [Genesis 25:6 KJB].

Abraham, after the death of Sarah [Genesis 23:1-20 KJB], "again ... took a wife, and her name was Keturah." [Genesis 25:1 KJB], whose sons were "Zimran, and Jokshan, and Medan, and Midian, and Ishbak, and Shuah." [Genesis 25:2 KJB], "And Jokshan begat Sheba, and Dedan. ..." [Genesis 25:3 KJB], whose names are still found in the cities of the Arabian penisula [see Genesis 25:1-4; 1 Chronicles 1:32,33 KJB], such as Dedanim [Isaiah 21:13 KJB], and Midian, as well as descendants of Amalek [no primary relation to Ishmael [* see below], except through possible later co-mingling], and also of Esau [Edomites, Idumeans], etc. These having no relation to Ishmael's line, except through later co-mingling, among the Ishmeelites, Midianites, Edomites, Egyptians, Persians, Syrians, etc. There are texts which declare that the sons/descendants of Ishmael migrated further into the Arabian peninsula, such as "Kedar", "Tema" etc. whose cities names are named after there, [see Genesis 28:9, 36:3; 1 Chronicles 5:18-23; Job 6:19-20; Isaiah 21:13-17, 42:11, 60:5-7; Jeremiah 2:10, 25:17-33, 49:28-33; Ezekiel 27:21; Psalms 120:1-7 KJB].

The word Arabia, means to mix, to be intermingled, a mixed multitude, and from that we can see this in Genesis 37:25-28, 39:1; Judges 8:21-28; 1 Chronicles 2:17, 5:10,19,20, 27:30,31; Psalms 83:6; Galatians 4:22-31 KJB.

As far as the Bible [KJB] is concerned, it never specifically states that Ishmael himself moved into the Arbaian peninsula, though it is possible being to the "east", but even this of itself would not make him Arabian [Moses was born in Egypt, it doesn't make him Egyptian, and lived in Midian, it doesn't make him of Midian], nor the Father of all Arabians, but simply a sojourner there, his children, according to the Bible [KJB], being of Hebrew/Egyptian/Egyptian [father, mother [Hagar, and the Hagarenes], wife] blood at the first, then later becoming more intermingled among the various people groups who were already in the region [whether partially Egyptian, Canaanite, Joktanite, Palgite, Sinite, etc].

[*] Amalek [some have thought that Amalek, or the original primary Amalekites was/were of Ishmael, but this is not so, see the following Genealogy]:

Isaac [was the son of Abraham [the Hebrew] and Sarah [Sarai, half-sister to Abram, Genesis 12:13, 20:2,12 KJB], Genesis 17:19,21, 21:1-8, 35:29; 1 Chronicles 1:28,34; Matthew 1:2; Luke 3:34 KJB], and he was married to Rebekah [Genesis 22:23, 24:62-67 KJB], daughter of Bethuel [the Syrian of Padanaram, Genesis 22:23, 24:15,24,47, 25:20, 28:5 KJB], son of Nahor and Milcah [Genesis 22:20 KJB], of the ancient land of Abraham, Ur of the Chaldees [Genesis 11:28,31, 15:7; Nehemiah 9:7 KJB].

Rebekah - [married Isaac, Abrahams' + Sarah's son] [Granddaughter to Nahor + Milcah; Grandniece/Great Granddaughter to Haran; Great Grandniece [by Bethuel [the syrian] through Nahor + Milcah] / Great Great Grandniece [by Bethuel [the syrian] through Milcah through Haran] to Abraham; which makes her 2nd [through Nahor + Milcah] and 3rd [through Bethuel [the syrian] through Milcah through Haran] cousin to Isaac, also then being his wife.]​

Through Isaac and Rebekah, came Jacob [Israel] and Esau.

Esau [aka: Edom/Idumea, as per Genesis 36:1,8, Isaiah 34:5,6; Ezekiel 35:15, 36:5 KJB]

Esau married several persons:

Judith [daughter of Beeri the Hittite, as per Genesis 26:34 KJB]

Bashemath [daughter of Elon the Hittite, as per Genesis 26:34 KJB]

Mahalath [aka: Bashemath, daughter of Ishmael, sister of Nebajoth as per Genesis 25:13, 28:9, 36:3 KJB]

Adah [daughter of Elon the Hittite, as per Genesis 36:2,4 KJB]

Aholibamah [daughter of Anah, daughter of Zibeon the Hivite, as per Genesis 36:2,5,14 KJB]​

It was through Esau and Adah, that Eliphaz came, and then from him, Amalek eventually came:

[Esau + Adah] Amalek was of, Eliphaz [born in Canaan [Genesis 36:5 KJB], who was a son of Esau, 1 Chronicles 1:35 KJB, by Adah [Genesis 36:4 KJB], the daughter of Elon the Hittite [a child of Heth, Genesis 23:10 KJB, a son of Canaan [Genesis 10:15 KJB], a son of Ham [Genesis 10:6 KJB], a son of Noah [Genesis 10:1 KJB], etc], and therefore one of the daughters of Canaan, Genesis 36:2 KJB] by [the concubine, Genesis 36:12 KJB] Timna [1 Chronicles 1:36 KJB], who was the sister of Lotan [Genesis 36:22; 1 Chronicles 1:39 KJB]. Lotan was a child of Seir [Genesis 36:20,21,29; 1 Chronicles 1:38 KJB]. Seir was called the "Horite, who inhabited the land" [Genesis 36:20 KJB], aka "Horims" [Deuteronomy 2:12,22 KJB], and the Horites [cave-dwellers] lived in their mount Seir [Genesis 14:6 KJB], country of Edom [Genesis 32:3 KJB].​

Therefore, with all of this research and documentation [further Islamic and/or Biblical [KJB] genealogical record unto Adam where requested], my Question 004 is as follows:

Is it necessary on the part of the believer of Islam, to believe/teach and say that Isma'il [Ishmael] was "the" [singular, definite article] 'Father of the Arab/s' in the face of the presented material, and even though the Qur'an does not say it, or is it perfectly admissible to believe/teach and say that he was possibly an [one of several] ancestor of some [not all] of the Arab[ian] peoples, some of whom would become a great [large] nation [people group]? If not permissible, is there an authentic Islamic source which says so?

Thank you for any and all serious consideration.

All this to ask about Ismail ?
It's well known to children studying Islam.
There are different ancestors of Arabs.
Ismail is father of a portion of Arabs. He's the father of Arabs in Makkah only.
Very simple
So what ?

 

[Limo]

All Jesuit stuff. Read it, seen it, heard it, rejected it based upon actual evidence in scripture:

Psa 12:6 The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.
Psa 12:7 Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

God Himself stated by inspiration that He would preserve His own Inspired words.

You may see that here (view playlist):

Or you may follow this link to the following (just scroll down to the following):

The preserved word of God (Psalms 12:6-7) in the English language – The King James Bible (KJB) – AV1611 – Vindicated Files (PDF & Powerpoint):

You may also peruse the following link:

http://www.pearltrees.com/awhn/kjv-bible-vindicated/id1593484

As for historicity of Jesus, see (I have a lot more) - Link

Give me just one evedance from trusted non Christian source

 

[Limo]

So, who was mohammeds father ?

Mohamed's father is Abdullah He is Mohammed bin Abdullah bin Abdul Muttalib bin Hashem bin Abdul Manaf bin Qusay bin Klab bin Marab bin Ka'b bin Louay bin Ghalib bin Fahr bin Malik bin Nadar bin Kenanah bin Khuzayma bin Madrka bin Elias bin Mudar bin Nizar bin Maad bin Adnan bin Ismail bin Ibrahim

 

[Crosstian]

Thank you for your friendly reply.

I see you are new on RF, so welcome to RF.

Wish you a good stay here.

Thank you. Appreciated.

 

[Crosstian]

@Crosstian

brother. I tagged you this way because your posts are way way too long to concentrate on and so far I have seen a large body of text, so let me ask simple questions so that one can have a dialog. You said you have studied 1000 or more pages (if I remember right) of Islamic documents, so you know the subject. ...

Actually what I said was that I have over 1,000 pages of personal study on the subject readily available at hand. I have read more than 1,000's of pages on Islam, qur'an, hadith, tafsir, etc. I hope that clarifies that statement earlier made.

 

[Crosstian]

Give me just one evedance from trusted non Christian source

Why would you have to throw out the keepers of the oracles of God, and accept evidence from non-believers only? Do you use the same standards of scale for dealing with mss in qur'anic studies? Do you rely upon Tom Holland, Patricia Crone., etc, for such?

What if I asked you to simply disregard all Islamic "scholars", Mufti's, Sheiks, etc and simply rely only upon secular, non-believers? I think, you dear Limo, would laugh at me for making such a request, but I could be wrong.

 

[firedragon]

Actually what I said was that I have over 1,000 pages of personal study on the subject readily available at hand. I have read more than 1,000's of pages on Islam, qur'an, hadith, tafsir, etc. I hope that clarifies that statement earlier made.

Alright. Yet. You quoted the Aisha's story about the goat eating part of the Quran.

You didnt say if you believe that story. Do you really believe that story?

 

[Limo]

Why would you have to throw out the keepers of the oracles of God, and accept evidence from non-believers only? Do you use the same standards of scale for dealing with mss in qur'anic studies? Do you rely upon Tom Holland, Patricia Crone., etc, for such?

What if I asked you to simply disregard all Islamic "scholars", Mufti's, Sheiks, etc and simply rely only upon secular, non-believers? I think, you dear Limo, would laugh at me for making such a request, but I could be wrong.

You're calling these people non believers, I also non believer of your God and your Jesus.
Jesus meth schoolers don't provide evidences for non existence of Jesus.
They just throwing your faked evidences
Why do you care about Quranic studies ?
Regarding your question about putting aside Quran, Hadeeth, mufti,,, and follow secular. I follow Quran, Hadeeth, and fatwa in warship and beleive, I can't put aside these in worshipping and beleive but...
When secular, or Christian, or atheist ask any question or discrepancy or historical issue, I read then understand then get a logical answer.
I can't defend my belief with non Muslims using Islamic sources but logic and History.

Now give me one evidance from trusted non Christian source that your Jesus existed, your Jesus is the God, crucifixed, resurrected ????

 

[Crosstian]

Alright. Yet. You quoted the Aisha's story about the goat eating part of the Quran.

You didnt say if you believe that story. Do you really believe that story?

Actually, the reference given in Islamic (not mine) hadith, is to a "sheep" (Link; PDF page 114 (n113), chapter corrected, mistyped, should be "C. 36"), not a goat, but it doesn't matter so much to me whether you think it was a sheep or a goat (Link) (I went with the source I have, cited in OP links), I can only go by what is actually written in Islamic sources. The following was the reference cited, in relation to verses which were removed/redacted from "Q".

"...Sunan Ibn Majah, Volume 3, Book 9, Chapter 36, Number 1944 -

“... 1944. It was narrated that 'Aisha said: “The verse of stoning and of breastfeeding an adult ten times was revealed, and the paper was with me under my pillow. When the Messenger of Allah died, we were preoccupied with his death, and a tame sheep came in and ate it.” (Hasan)
..." - 'Apologiz-ing' (1 Pet. 3:15) to Muslims and Islam
​

Please notice, that I gave the full citation, from Sunan Ibn Majah, and noted its present 'ranking' therein, as "Hasan". Which according to Islamic scholars and classification, is a "strong" hadith, but with some doubt as to authenticity (by later scholars who came up with the ranking system), based upon a minor alteration in "narration' in differing hadith sources for it (see your own link, you provided).

So, Hasan, doesn't mean invalid, or incorrect, or untrue. It doesn't mean "weak" (Daif) in terms of transmission by "chain", even though later on, Shaykh Shu’aib Arnaud (Musnad Ahmad) classified it as "daif" (of course he would, as he needs it to be, but even if granted it was "daif" (I do not grant), weak still doesn't mean untrue, invalid, not accepted, as "daif" is only dealing with matters of classifying transmission of hadith, based upon current hadith scholarship). It simply means under current classification, that there is some argument (among scholars) as to verifiable authenticity. You will find many such "Hasan" transmissions amidst the Sunnah. Most aren't even questioned, and accepted as genuine by scholars and laymen alike. It usually only comes into play when it would touch "q", such as this, as noticed/pointed out by non-muslims (such as myself).

The notations in Sunan Ibn Majah, are as follows (linked above, same PDF page):

"... a. These are such Verses that their recitation has been abrogated, while the rule remained in force; therefore, the Companions did not write it in the copy of the Qur'an.

b. It is proven from other Ahadith that the latest rule regarding the prohibition of fosterage is for suckling five times, and this is the preferred view. ..."​

That is an amazing admission in regards the "Companions" and what went into the presently compiled "q".

The link which you provided again tries to find fault with Ibn Ishaq, but I can cite as many scholars which praise Ibn Ishaq in his careful studies of hadith. So, merely finding someone to 'poo-poo' on Ibn Ishaq when they need to, isn't all that helpful, especially when just as many if not more are favorable to Ibn Ishaq. Yet, that is all red-herring to the subject of "q" itself, and what constituted the original materials, which are no longer in "q". The matter of Aishah and the sheep (goat, whatever), and the ayah now lost, is in Islamic material, and not something I made up, or pulled from thin air. It is in several sources, even as your own link provided, though attempting to mitigate it to irrelevancy, by simply saying it was "abrogated".

This is the point. That something existed before which was part of "q", and suddenly no longer is, for whatever reason, being accepted as "abrogated" and subsequently redacted by whatever means (sheep/goat, or otherwise (Companions), being most irrelevant).

What I believe of the matter is of no real account. I am not citing for what I believe, per se, but what Islamic sources themselves say.

 

[Crosstian]

You're calling these people non believers, I also non believer of your God and your Jesus.
Jesus meth schoolers don't provide evidences for non existence of Jesus.
They just throwing your faked evidences
Why do you care about Quranic studies ?
Regarding your question about putting aside Quran, Hadeeth, mufti,,, and follow secular. I follow Quran, Hadeeth, and fatwa in warship and beleive, I can't put aside these in worshipping and beleive but...
When secular, or Christian, or atheist ask any question or discrepancy or historical issue, I read then understand then get a logical answer.
I can't defend my belief with non Muslims using Islamic sources but logic and History.

Now give me one evidance from trusted non Christian source that your Jesus existed ...

Let me see if I understand you (Limo) correctly. As a member of "Islam", who adheres to "Qur'an", "Hadith", etc; you "limo" are denying the historicity of the person "Jesus" of Nazareth because my primary source is scripture (KJB), which itself is an historical documentation of Jesus by multiple eyewitnesses and those present afterwards?

You do realize that to question the historicity of Jesus, by relying upon the already debunked and falsified Jesus-mythers (not taken seriously by anyone in the religious, 'scholarly', or even secular fields of historical studies), you automatically undermine "qur'an", all "hadith" which speak on the subject of Jesus.

So, my question to you remains, in regards merely secular sources, as opposed to the preservers of the oracles of God.

Now, as to matters in regards Jesus, dying by crucifixion, etc, worshipped as God, etc was already given to you - Link, see bottom Link

For instance:

Tacitus:

“Such indeed were the precautions of human wisdom. The next thing was to seek means of propitiating the gods, and recourse was had to the Sibylline books, by the direction of which prayers were offered to Vulcanus, Ceres, and Proserpina. Juno, too, was entreated by the matrons, first, in the Capitol, then on the nearest part of the coast, whence water was procured to sprinkle the fane and image of the goddess. And there were sacred banquets and nightly vigils celebrated by married women. But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order.Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judæa, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.

Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence,even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man's cruelty, that they were being destroyed.”[Cornelius Tacitus; Annals [Ab excessu divi Augusti (Annals)]; Book 15; Chapter 44 English]- http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/...201999.02.0078

“44. Et haec quidem humanis consiliis providebantur. mox petita [a] dis piacula aditique Sibyllae libri, ex quibus supplicatum Volcano et Cereri Proserpinaeque, ac propitiata Iuno per matronas, primum in Capitolio, deinde apud proximum mare, unde hausta aqua templum et simulacrum deae perspersum est; et sellisternia ac pervigilia celebravere feminae, quibus mariti erant. Sed non ope humana, non largitionibus principis aut deum placamentis decedebat infamia, quin iussum incendium crederetur.ergo abolendo rumori Nero subdidit reos et quaesitissimis poenis adfecit, quos per flagitia invisos vulgus Chrestianos appellabat. auctor nominis eius Christus Tibero imperitante per procuratorem Pontium Pilatum supplicio adfectus erat; repressaque in praesens exitiablilis superstitio rursum erumpebat, non modo per Iudaeam, originem eius mali, sed per urbem etiam, quo cuncta undique atrocia aut pudenda confluunt celebranturque. igitur primum correpti qui fatebantur, deinde indicio eorum multitudo ingens haud proinde in crimine incendii quam odio humani generis convicti sunt. et pereuntibus addita ludibria, ut ferarum tergis contecti laniatu canum interirent aut crucibus adfixi [aut flammandi atque], ubi defecisset dies, in usu[m] nocturni luminis urerentur. hortos suos ei spectaculo Nero obtulerat, et circense ludicrum edebat, habitu aurigae permixtus plebi vel curriculo insistens. unde quamquam adversus sontes et novissima exempla meritos miseratio oriebatur, tamquam non utilitate publica, sed in saevitiam unius absumerentur.”[Cornelius Tacitus; Annals [Ab excessu divi Augusti (Annals)]] Book 15; Chapter 44 Latin]- Tacitus: Annals: Book 15 [40]

Annals Book 15; Chapter 44 scan [the second Medicean manuscript] [see line 6, 2nd word [chrestianos] and line 7 1st word [christus]] - http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...s/1/1d/MII.png​

Thus from Secular History we have:

[1.]“Christians”were being persecuted and tortured by Nero, even“nailed to crosses”, of which even arose“a feeling of compassion”after a time from the citizens of Rome(Matthew 10:18; Mark 13:9 *a).

[2.]“Christ”, was the name for which they[Christians]are so named(Acts 11:26, 26:28; 1 Peter 4:16 *b).

[3.]This Christ “suffered the extreme penalty” [crucifixion](Matthew 27:26; Mark 15:15; Luke 24:20; John 19:16; 1 Corinthians 2:8; etc *c).

[4.]This Christ died “at the hands” of “Pontius Pilate” (John 19:15 *d).

[5.]This Christ was put to death “during the reign of Tiberius” Caesar(Luke 3:1-2 *e).

[6.]These Christians, were said to be following a “superstition” (Acts 25:19 *f)[religious belief]by the Romans.

[7.]These Christians had to first be “checked” in Judaea, being according to the Romans, “the first source of the evil” (Matthew 2:1; Acts 1:8, 8:1; etc. *g).

[8.]These Christians were then also found to spring up “even in Rome” itself, after it was found originating from Judaea(Acts 19:21, 23:11; Romans 1:7,15; etc. *h).​

 

[Crosstian]

... Now give me one evidance from trusted non Christian source that your Jesus existed ...

Seutonius:

“25 He rearranged the military career of the knights, assigning a division of cavalry after a cohort, and next the tribunate of a legion. He also instituted a series of military positions and a kind of fictitious service, which is called "supernumerary" and could be performed in absentia and in name only. He even had the Fathers pass a decree forbidding soldiers to enter the houses of senators to pay their respects. He confiscated p51the property of those freedmen who passed as Roman knights, and reduced to slavery again such as were ungrateful and a cause of complaint to their patrons, declaring to their advocates that he would not entertain a suit against their own freedmen.71 2 When certain men were exposing their sick and worn out slaves on the Island of Aesculapius72 because of the trouble of treating them, Claudius decreed that all such slaves were free, and that if they recovered, they should not return to the control of their master; but if anyone preferred to kill such a slave rather than to abandon him, he was liable to the charge of murder. He provided by an edict that travellers should not pass through the towns of Italy except on foot, or in a chair or litter. He stationed a cohort at Puteoli and one at Ostia, to guard against the danger of fires.

3 He forbade men of foreign birth to use the Roman names so far as those of the clans73 were concerned. Those who usurped the privileges of Roman citizenship he executed in the Esquiline field.74 He restored to the senate the provinces of Achaia and Macedonia, which Tiberius had taken into his own charge. He deprived the Lycians of their independence because of deadly intestine feuds, and restored theirs to the Rhodians, since they had given up their former faults. He allowed the people of Ilium perpetual exemption from tribute, on the ground that they were the founders of the Roman race, reading an ancient letter of the senate and people of p53Rome written in Greek to king Seleucus, in which they promised him their friendship and alliance only on condition that he should keep their kinsfolk of Ilium free from every burden.4 Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus,75 he expelled them from Rome.He allowed the envoys of the Germans to sit in the orchestra, led by their naïve self-confidence; for when they had been taken to the seats occupied by the common people and saw the Parthian and Armenian envoys sitting with the senate, they moved of their own accord to the same part of the theatre, protesting that their merits and rank were no whit inferior. 5 He utterly abolished the cruel and inhuman religion of the Druids among the Gauls, which under Augustus had merely been prohibited to Roman citizens; on the other hand he even attempted to transfer the Eleusinian rites from Attica to Rome, and had the temple of Venus Erycina in Sicily, which had fallen to ruin through age, restored at the expense of the treasury of the Roman people. He struck his treaties with foreign princes in the Forum, sacrificing a pig76 and reciting the ancient formula of the fetial priests.77 But these and other acts, and in fact almost the whole conduct of his reign, were dictated not so much by his own judgment as that of his wives and freedmen, since he nearly always acted in accordance with their interests and desires.”[Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus; The Lives Of The Caesars; Life of Claudius [De Vita Claudii]; Section 25.4 English]- Suetonius • Life of Claudius

“25 Equestris militias ita ordinavit, ut post cohortem alam, post alam tribunatum legionis daret; stipendiaque instituit et imaginariae militiae genus, quod vocatur "supra numerum," quo absentes et titulo tenus fungerentur. Milites domus senatorias salutandi causa ingredi etiam patrum decreto prohibuit. Libertinos, qui se pro equitibus R. p50 agerent, publicavit, ingratos et de quibus patroni quererentur revocavit in servitutem advocatisque eorum negavit se adversus libertos ipsorum ius dicturum. 2 Cum quidam aegra et adfecta mancipia in insulam Aesculapi taedio medendi exponerent, omnes qui exponerentur liberos esse sanxit, nec redire in dicionem domini, si convaluissent; quod si quis necare quem mallet quam exponere, caedis crimine teneri. Viatores ne per Italiae oppida nisi aut pedibus aut sella aut lectica transirent, monuit edicto. Puteolis et Ostiae singulas cohortes ad arcendos incendiorum casus collocavit.

3 Peregrinae condicionis homines vetuit usurpare Romana nomina dum taxat gentilicia. Civitatem R. usurpantes in campo Esquilino37 securi percussit. Provincias Achaiam et Macedoniam, quas Tiberius ad curam suam transtulerat, senatui reddidit. Luciis ob exitiabiles inter se discordias libertatem ademit, Rhodiis ob paenitentiam veterum delictorum reddidit. Iliensibus quasi Romanae gentis auctoribus tributa in perpetuum remisit recitata vetere epistula Graeca p52senatus populique R. Seleuco regi amicitiam et societatem ita demum pollicentis, si consanguineos suos Ilienses ab omni onere immunes praestitisset.4 Iudaeos impulsore Chresto assidue tumultuantisº Roma expulit.Germanorum legatis in orchestra sedere permisit, simplicitate eorum et fiducia commotus, quod in popularia deducti, cum animadvertissent Parthos et Armenios sedentis in senatu, ad eadem loca sponte transierant, nihilo deteriorem virtutem aut condicionem suam praedicantes. 5 Druidarum38 religionem apud Gallios dirae immanitatis et tantum civibus sub Augusto interdictam penitus abolevit; contra sacra Eleusinia etiam transferre ex Attica Romam conatus est, templumque in Sicilia Veneris Erycinae vetustate conlapsum ut ex aerario pop. R. reficeretur, auctor fuit. Cum regibus foedus in Foro icit39 porca caesa ac vetere fetialium praefatione adhibita. Sed et haec et cetera totumque adeo ex parte magna principatum non tam suo quam uxorum libertorumque arbitrio administravit, talis ubique plerumque, qualem esse eum aut expediret illis aut liberet.”[Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus; The Lives Of The Caesars; Life of Claudius [De Vita Claudii]; Section 25.4 Latin]- Suetonius • Vita Divi Claudii

The Lives Of The Caesars; Life Of Claudius [De Vita Claudii]; Liber V [Book 5]; Divus Claudius; page 94, Lines 8-9; “4 Iudaeos impulsore Chresto assidue tumultuantisº Roma expulit.”]- http://ia600406.us.archive.org/27/items/cu31924064186822/cu31924064186822.pdf

“16 He devised a new form for the buildings of the city and in front of the houses and apartments he erected porches, from the flat roofs of which fires could be fought;44 and these he put up at his own cost. He had also planned to extend the walls as far as Ostia and to bring the sea from there to Rome by a canal.

2 During his reign many abuses were severely punished and put down, and no fewer new laws were made: a limit was set to expenditures; the public banquets were confined to a distribution of food; the sale of any kind of cooked viands in the taverns was forbidden, with the exception of pulse and vegetables, whereas before every sort of dainty was exposed for sale.45 Punishment was inflicted on the Christians, a class of men given to a new and mischievous superstition.He put an end to the diversions of the chariot drivers, who from immunity of long standing claimed the right of ranging at large and amusing themselves by cheating and robbing the people. The pantomimic actors and their partisans were banished from the city.46”[Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus; The Lives Of The Caesars; Life of Nero [De Vita Neronis] Section 16.2 English] - Suetonius • Life of Nero

“16 Formam aedificiorum urbis novam excogitavit et ut ante insulas ac domos porticus essent, de quarum13 solariis incendia arcerentur; easque sumptu suo exstruxit. Destinarat etiam Ostia tenus moenia promovere atque inde fossa mare veteri urbi inducere.

2 Multa sub eo et animadversa severe et coercita nec minus instituta: adhibitus sumptibus modus; publicae cenae ad sportulas redactae; interdictum ne quid in popinis cocti praeter legumina aut holera veniret, cum antea nullum non obsonii genus proponeretur;afflicti suppliciis Christiani, genus hominum superstitionis novae ac maleficae; vetiti quadrigariorum lusus, quibus inveterata licentia passim vagantibus fallere ac furari per iocum ius erat; pantomimorum factiones cum ipsis simul relegatae.”[Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus; The Lives Of The Caesars; Life of Nero [De Vita Neronis] Section 16.2 Latin]- Suetonius • Vita Neronis

The Lives Of The Caesars; Life Of Nero [De Vita Neronis]; Liber VI [Book 6]; Nero; page 115, Lines 6-7; “afflicti suppliciis Christiani, genus hominum superstitionis novae ac maleficae;”] - http://ia600406.us.archive.org/27/items/cu31924064186822/cu31924064186822.pdf​

Thus, again, from Secular History we have:

[1.]“Jews” ['Christians'; 'seen' as a 'sect' thereof [Acts 24:5, 28:22*a]] were “constantly” causing “disturbances” in “Rome”.

[2.]These “disturbances”, according to the Romans, were “at the instigation” of “Chrestus” [Christ] [Matthew 28:19-20; Mark 16:15,20; Luke 24:44-49; Acts 1:8 *b].

[3.]These “Jews” were then “expelled” from “Rome” [Acts 18:2 *c]by Claudius Caesar's command.

[4.]The open use of the designation “Christians” [Acts 11:26, 26:28 *d]in Rome is now noted in the reign of Nero Caesar.

[5.] “Punishment was inflicted upon the Christians” by the Romans [1 Peter 4:16 *e].

[6.]These “Christians” are called a “class of men” given to a “new … superstition” [religion] [Acts 17:18-34; Romans 1:15 *f].​