• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

How certain are we that Jesus was historical?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Desert Snake

Veteran Member
Josephus's mentions of Jesus, or the places where he chose to make these mentions, do count as indirect, secondary (tertiary?) evidence for Jesus's life, but I think that any mention of foreigner converts applied to movements after J's death...?

I have a copy right here..:D

let me check..

It seems to indicate that Gentiles were followers from the time even of his teachings.
p.s. I consider Josephus on Jesus legit.
pps doesn't seem to COMPLETELY specify a timeline of gentile adherence.
 

oldbadger

Skanky Old Mongrel!
To read the story of Jesus one must accept satan.
The scriptures mention satan many times, he(?) was the vile of life.
Most people who are not theists don't believe in him(?).
Picture him(?) with a tail and carrying a staff, remember, he was an angel at first.
How he(?) got the tail eludes me! But, Jesus talked to him(?) but shooed him away.
If one doesn't believe in Jesus, one can't believe in satan.
Someone is telling tales.
Now.....from where did the angels come, thousands of them, bunched up on that needle point, with their harps and swords.
I really love mythology.............
~
'mud

Hi 'mud! :)
I think that there was a Jesus, the Galilean healer ....... but I think that his conversations with satan are just metaphors for the personal struggles within Jesus after John the Baptist's arrest. I think Jesus had a comparatively good life as a travelling healer and social guide, and the temptation to let go of John's mission and take up his old life around the lakeside must have been quite strong. So..... during the time (40 ish days?) that he hid out in the desert after John was taken could have been spun into the bible story.... ?

But that's just me and my crazy head thinking on posts! :) I still only think that Jesus was a man with a passion and ability for healing.....
 

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
Ingledsva said:
Actually most of the religions in that area practiced sacrifice, generally of crops and animals, but also the ultimate sacrifice to God, - a human. Which I might add - is what Christianity came up with in the Sacrificed Jesus story.

The first born that opened the womb, - were Sacrificed to Ba'al. The Hebrew originally followed these Gods and Goddesses, and they too Sacrificed the First Born Son.

We know they followed Goddess, as there is a verse saying they were better off when they follow her.
This is like a hodge-podge of sketchy deduction. And the 'goddess' reference is saying how they should not be worshipping other deities, you're getting it backward.


It is not hodge-podge or sketchy.


Exodus 22: 29 –Thou shalt not delay TO OFFER the FIRST of thy ripe fruits, and of thy liquors: THE FIRSTBORN OF THY SONS SHALT THOU GIVE UNTO ME.

Leviticus 27: 28, 29 Notwithstanding NO devoted thing, that a man shall devote unto the Lord of all that he hath, BOTH OF MAN and beast, and of the field of his possession, shall be sold or redeemed: every devoted thing is most holy unto the Lord.

29 – None devoted, which shall be devoted of men shall be redeemed; BUT SHALL SURELY BE PUT TO DEATH.


From Catholic Encyclopedia -
"The custom of causing one's children to pass through the fire seems to have been general in the Northern Kingdom [IV (II) Kings, xvii, 17; Ezech. xxiii, 37], and it gradually grew in the Southern, encouraged by the royal example of Achaz (IV Kings, xvi, 3) and Manasses [IV (II) Kings, xvi, 6] till it became prevalent in the time of the prophet Jeremias (Jerem. xxxii, 35), when King Josias suppressed the worship of Moloch and defiled Tophet [IV (II) Kings, xxiii, 13 (10)]. It is not improbable that this worship was revived under Joakim and continued until the Babylonian Captivity …"


“In the week's Torah portion, G-d says about the Mishkan( Tabernacle) "V'neekdash Bichvodi", I will be made holy in my honor (loosely translated). The Talmud says to read it that "I will be made holy through my honored ones" referring to Aaron's 2 son's who were killed. Their death was part of the dedication of the Mishkan…”
Hypermail Torah-Forum Archive: Re: Human Sacrifice


Eze 20:26 And - I - polluted them in their own gifts, in that they caused to pass through the fire all that openeth the womb, that I might make them desolate, to the end that they might know that I am the LORD.


Jewish Ritual Murder, a Historical Investigation, by Hellmut Schramm, Ph.D

THE DEATH AND RESURRECTION OF THE BELOVED SON
The Transformation of Child Sacrifice in Judaism and Christianity Jon D. Levenson

"Tracing from Canaanite to Christian thought the humiliations, deaths, and exaltations of sons and heirs, Levenson intrigues, astounds, and undermines many dearly held theological beliefs. This tour de force offers fascinating discussions of such matters as child sacrifice and the deity's right to the first-born; the paschal sacrifice and other Israelite rituals as symbolic substitutes for the son and heir."--A. J. Levine, Choice

Eze 23:37 That they have committed adultery, and blood is in their hands, and with their idols have they committed adultery, and have also caused their sons, whom they bare unto me, to pass for them through the fire, to devour them.

2Ki 16:3 But he walked in the way of the kings of Israel, yea, and made his son to pass through the fire, according to the abominations of the heathen, whom the LORD cast out from before the children of Israel.



Nor does it matter what some thought of it. The facts are that the people kept right on worshiping the Goddess. Which is what I said.


Jer 7:17 Seest thou not what they do in the cities of Judah and in the streets of Jerusalem?

Jer 7:18 The children gather wood, and the fathers kindle the fire, and the women knead their dough, to make cakes to the Queen of Heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto other gods, that they may provoke me to anger.

**

Jer 44:17 But we will certainly do whatsoever thing goeth forth out of our own mouth, to burn incense unto the Queen of Heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her, as we have done, we, and our fathers, our kings, and our princes, in the cities of Judah, and in the streets of Jerusalem: for then had we plenty of victuals, and were well, and saw no evil.

Jer 44:18 But since we left off to burn incense to the Queen of Heaven, and to pour out drink offerings unto her,we have wanted all things, and have been consumed by the sword and by the famine.

**

And of course 1 & 2 Kings and 1 &2 Chronicles tell us the same thing.


They were trying to force them into ONE God worship, - on pain of DEATH.


And the KINGS and the PEOPLE turned back to their Goddess and God anyway.

Over and Over they slaughtered their own people to force a new religion on them.

*
 
Last edited:

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
...


Josephus's mentions of Jesus, or the places where he chose to make these mentions, do count as indirect, secondary (tertiary?) evidence for Jesus's life, but I think that any mention of foreigner converts applied to movements after J's death...?


The short paragraph in Josephus' work is considered an inserted fake by most Scholars.


*
 

LegionOnomaMoi

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The short paragraph in Josephus' work is considered an inserted fake by most Scholars.


*

There are two passages in Josephus which refer to Jesus. The vast majority of scholars believe that both were , in some form, original to Josephus. The vast majority also believe that the longer passage has been altered by Christian scribes. An even greater majority believes the shorter reference to be unaltered and original.
 

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
There are two passages in Josephus which refer to Jesus. The vast majority of scholars believe that both were , in some form, original to Josephus. The vast majority also believe that the longer passage has been altered by Christian scribes. An even greater majority believes the shorter reference to be unaltered and original.


I will assume the "second" you refer to is the "Jesus, son of Damneus" part?


The other is thought to be altered or totally written by Eusebius in the fourth century.


So, no usable Jesus info in Josephus.


*
 

LegionOnomaMoi

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I will assume the "second" you refer to is the "Jesus, son of Damneus" part?
No. τὸν ἀδελφὸν Ἰησοῦ τοῦ λεγομένου Χριστοῦ, Ἰάκωβος ὄνομα αὐτῷ
 

LegionOnomaMoi

Veteran Member
Premium Member
The other is thought to be altered or totally written by Eusebius in the fourth century.
By whom and why? Virtually all the methods used to determine whether or not there is some interpolation in some manuscript is textual critical methods. These rely on a combination of manuscript attestation and textual, linguistic, historical, and similar evidence. We've centuries of such evidence and research here. What is your basis for your assertion?


So, no usable Jesus info in Josephus.
Because? Can you point to linguistic, textual critical, or similar evidence to support your claim?
 

Bunyip

pro scapegoat
I will assume the "second" you refer to is the "Jesus, son of Damneus" part?


The other is thought to be altered or totally written by Eusebius in the fourth century.


So, no usable Jesus info in Josephus.


*

You raise a valid point. One part of Jospehus is indeed widely accepted to be a later interpolation, and the other refers to several Jesus' and so is problematic in that it suggests several histprical figures as opposed to one.
 

LegionOnomaMoi

Veteran Member
Premium Member
No worries mate. You have covered your views on my knowledge very thoroughly.

And you have done nothing but to indicate my views on your ignorance are anything but correct (unless, of course, I overestimate the extent to which you do not know of what you speak).

I quoted the relevant Greek in Josephus. Can you analyze it (or any Greek in Josephus)? Can you indicate the faintest degree of familiarity with textual criticism? Can you name the extant Josephus manuscripts? Can you present any argument that isn't based upon
1) ignorance of Josephus' language
2) ignorance of Josephan manuscripts
3) ignorance of the Greek language
4) inability to either recognize or apply basic logic?

No.
 

Bunyip

pro scapegoat
Legion

This is not a war buddy, it is just a casual conversation. People are discussing topics of interest. I think you need to calm down, back up a little and just relax.

Your posts address my character, my scholarship, my knowledge a great deal Legion. I am here to discuss the topic, not to have a contest of whose appeal to authority trumps whose - or to hear another repeat of your personal assesments.

I am not one of your poor students that you get to bully. I am just another member here to share ideas. I don't need to be able to read ancient Greek mate.
 
Last edited:

mahasn ebn sawresho

Well-Known Member
All I read is just ideas cannot be determined unequivocally
Because all of the participants have a cultural background and its own scientific
But the subject starting in the personal Jesus
Turning to question the acts of Jesus
Turning to the Bible stories and origins of the twelve tribes of Israel built
But everyone forgets
Plato as the standard legend also
Nero and Nero legend
So now we are legend
For what
Because any moment of time are on our actions cannot be returned back
But the only way to perpetuate and permanence of the past is quoted in books
We
We will give to future generations our editorial fruits
And also oral
That would be enshrined is transferred through blogging
 

LegionOnomaMoi

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Legion

This is not a war buddy
Correct, insofar as a battle between those using hewn stone and those using modern weaponry doesn't constitute a debate. You offer nothing, you present arguments that are incompatible, and you cannot demonstrate the faintest familiarity with the methods of historiography or logic..

People are discussing topics of interest.
I've received multiple frubals, and have read multiple responses, thanking me for responding to your complete incompatibility to make an argument that is logically consistent.

I think you need to calm down, back up a little and just relax.

I think you should demonstrate basic familiarity with historical methods, logic, and the other topics which you've relied upon.

Legion. I am here to discuss the topic

You haven't. All you have done is demonstrate a pathetic incapacity to realize what the topic is.
 

mahasn ebn sawresho

Well-Known Member
And geographical spot of the land of Iraq to Palestine
The axis of human movement in long periods of
They were in a State of evolution and constant motion
It's styled in top of the teachings of Jesus
When Europeans arrived to the lands of the new world in the Americas and Canada
Human was accessible
One full appearance like us
Eating and drinking and running around and fighting
But was this human knowledge of the creator as defined by East
You enable the human civilization
As did East and West
So these people and their actions are not myth
Because their influence significantly in the course of our lives today
 

mahasn ebn sawresho

Well-Known Member
I invite you to read one of the books of the Torah are quietly or ahadtaalim Christ
And you will know the importance of the Torah and the Gospel in every human life through the discipline of ethics and human values
Note I am a Chaldean Christian
When I see Jesus laanzer him that the legend but a fact
Because the written teachings from 0 200 years and today these teachings are valid
When read Psalms Daoud in the teachings of continuous influence despite the long time between Daoud and our lives today
Or when browsing through proverbs or other journeys of the Torah
I'm not a religious lecture
Sorry to you
 

Ingledsva

HEATHEN ALASKAN
No. τὸν ἀδελφὸν Ἰησοῦ τοῦ λεγομένου Χριστοῦ, Ἰάκωβος ὄνομα αὐτῷ

Antiquities 20.9.1. "And now Caesar, upon hearing the death of Festus, sent Albinus into Judea, as procurator. But the king deprived Joseph of the high priesthood, and bestowed the succession to that dignity on the son of Ananus, who was also himself called Ananus. Now the report goes that this eldest Ananus proved a most fortunate man; for he had five sons who had all performed the office of a high priest to God, and who had himself enjoyed that dignity a long time formerly, which had never happened to any other of our high priests. But this younger Ananus, who, as we have told you already, took the high priesthood, was a bold man in his temper, and very insolent; he was also of the sect of the Sadducees, who are very rigid in judging offenders, above all the rest of the Jews, as we have already observed; when, therefore, Ananus was of this disposition, he thought he had now a proper opportunity. Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done; they also sent to the king, desiring him to send to Ananus that he should act so no more, for that what he had already done was not to be justified; nay, some of them went also to meet Albinus, as he was upon his journey from Alexandria, and informed him that it was not lawful for Ananus to assemble a sanhedrim without his consent. Whereupon Albinus complied with what they said, and wrote in anger to Ananus, and threatened that he would bring him to punishment for what he had done; on which king Agrippa took the high priesthood from him, when he had ruled but three months, and made Jesus, the son of Damneus, high priest."


Note that in this "story," This Jesus does not die - he (the son of Damneus) is made High Priest.


Wrong time frame as well. King Agrippa reigned from 41 AD to 44 AD.




*
 

mahasn ebn sawresho

Well-Known Member
If I told you that I saw a man walking on fire and charcoal the volatile common crystal any glass and devours potato
Or goes upside down and return it to its place
Do you think I say myth or fairy tale
Note I have witnessed this with my own eyes
I also laasadk some events
One day I saw a man moves things with his eyes
Transfers from your pocket to the right pocket
And even removed the doubt asked this man away from me so that his hands be unable to access Pocket
I saw such a coincidence in my life
This will tell you that the actions of Christ according to what I have seen and very logical and
You are they will accuse me of lying
But all mkodsati not only watch it
It is possible you don't they believe in supernatural
And miracles
Tell you
In 1991 on 17-1 you are in one of the American strikes
If they have her space and time archive
But I survived with my group members miraculously
And to this day I do not understand why
Was it a miracle
Or coincidence
When explode near you, is only four meters in Earth Burrows plane extruded pit depth of four metres and exceeds amtarla survive them
Do you consider it a legend
When I bring you
How does with the life of Christ and his actions
That was in the age and time have no means of technology
Only seen live
Of the Jews
Therefore I believe that the acts
I found the install in my life
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top