Persecution of christians

[DinoDoc]

How did we get from discussing an idiotic school in New York to the existance of Jesus?

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
So do all the Synoptic Gospels have to repeat each other?

Of course they do. Don't they keep repeating things about Jesus?

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Well I think it 's high time somebody posted the account.

DId I not say "historical?"

[Ben Kenobi]

UR:

Ah, why do the Gospels not count as a historical source? They record the testimony of eyewitnesses.

Secondly, there is evidence that such censuses were done in this matter, where people would have to go to the place of their birth.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Ah, why do the Gospels not count as a historical source? They record the testimony of eyewitnesses.

Haven't we been through this a billion times? The NT has an abysmal record for historical accuracy. There are also no indications that they are what they assert, that they were written by eyewitnesses.

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Secondly, there is evidence that such censuses were done in this matter, where people would have to go to the place of their birth.

I did not contend that census did not happen, they did. It is just that none happened during that time frame (IIRC, 6 BCE to 1 CE).

[Mordoch]

Originally posted by MrFun
So you brush off archaeological evidence as "circumstantial?"

What evidence are you talking about? The startling thing seems to be the lack of any mention of Jesus, this includes writtings.

Consider the following list. These are the historians and writers who DID live within Christ's alleged lifetime or within a hundred years of it, after the time:

Apollonius Persius
Appian Petronius
Arrian Phaedrus
Aulus Gellius Philo-Judaeus
Columella Phlegon
Damis Pliny the Elder
Dio Chrysostom Pliny the Younger
Dion Pruseus Plutarch
Epictetus Pompon Mela
Favorinus Ptolemy
Florus Lucius Quintilian
Hermogones Quintius Curtius
Josephus Seneca
Justus of Tiberius Silius Italicus
Juvenal Statius
Lucanus Suetonius
Lucian Tacitus
Lysias Theon of Smyran
Martial Valerius Flaccus
Paterculus Valerius Maximus
Pausanias

Yet, aside from two FORGED passages in the works of a Jewish writer mentioned above, and two disputed passages in the works of Roman writers, there isn't ANY mention of Jesus Christ. At all.

http://www.holysmoke.org/sdhok/jesus5.htm

Additional commentary on the problems with using Flavius Josephus's writtings as proof of Jesus' existence and the relevant passage can be found at this site.

This passage is called the Testimonium Flavianum, and is sometimes cited by propagandists as independent confirmation of Jesus' existence and resurrection. However, there is excellent reason to suppose that this passage was not written in its present form by Josephus, but was either inserted or amended by later Christians:

The early Christian writer Origen claims that Josephus did NOT recognize Jesus as the Messiah, in direct contradiction to the above passage, where Josephus says, "He was the Messiah." Thus, we may conclude that this particular phrase at least was a later insertion. (The version given above was, however, known to Jerome and in the time of Eusebius. Jerome's Latin version, however, renders "He was the Messiah" by "He was believed to be the Christ.") Furthermore, other early Christian writers fail to cite this passage, even though it would have suited their purposes to do so. There is thus firm evidence that this passage was tampered with at some point, even if parts of it do date back to Josephus.

The passage is highly pro-Christian. It is hard to imagine that Josephus, a Pharisaic Jew, would write such a laudatory passage about a man supposedly killed for blasphemy. Indeed, the passage seems to make Josephus himself out to be a Christian, which was certainly not the case.
Many Biblical scholars reject the entire Testimonium Flavianum as a later Christian insertion. However, some maintain that Josephus's work originally did refer to Jesus, but that Christian copyists later expanded and made the text more favorable to Jesus. These scholars cite such phrases as "tribe of Christians" and "wise man" as being atypical Christian usages, but plausible if coming from a first century Palestinian Jew. Of course, a suitably clever Christian wishing to "dress up" Josephus would not have much trouble imitating his style.

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/scott_oser/hojfaq.html

Addtional evidence questioning the authenticity of this part of Joephus's writtings can be found here:

Not a single writer before the 4th century – not Justin, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Cyprian, Arnobius, etc. – in all their defences against pagan hostility, makes a single reference to Josephus’ wondrous words.

The third century Church 'Father' Origen, for example, spent half his life and a quarter of a million words contending against the pagan writer Celsus. Origen drew on all sorts of proofs and witnesses to his arguments in his fierce defence of Christianity. He quotes from Josephus extensively. Yet even he makes no reference to this 'golden paragraph' from Josephus, which would have been the ultimate rebuttal. In fact, Origen actually said that Josephus was "not believing in Jesus as the Christ."

http://jesusneverexisted.com/josephus-etal.htm

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
Ah, why do the Gospels not count as a historical source? They record the testimony of eyewitnesses.

1) They're not historical contemporary documents of the life of Jesus, as the earliest known gospel post-dates his supposed life by 2 decades, at least. If it must be explained why religious dogma isn't taken as historical truth when it's uncorroborrated, well then...

2) There is no evidence whatsoever that the gospels were written by eyewitnesses to the events. The earliest found manuscripts do not have any ascription, and it is commonly believed by theologians that the assigning of others was done c. 120 CE by Papias. On what basis he assigned the authorships is unknown, but the passage in John wherein the author claims to be an eyewitness was added by someone else, since it's not in the earlier manuscripts. That's called forgery.

[Ramo]

No one's stopping them from practicing.

Exactly. And no one's stopping people from being Christians by not putting up certain decorations at school. Regardless of whether or not this is right, it is not persecution.

Do Muslims in Muslim countries stop working during the entire month of Ramadan?

A lot of them do. And Christians from the US generally don't stop working for an entire month surrounding Christmas (in my experience).

As for Christmas break, in the world of PC, it is the 'Winter' holiday.

Regardless of what you call it, it still amounts to a Christmas holiday.

[MrFun]

Let's say a person was born in this world and actually existed.

Now, let's say that the mother and father never wrote anything about this person, nor provided evidence of his birth in any other form of evidence.

Now let's say that no one wrote about their relationship with this person either, as he grew from childhood to adulthood. And they did not leave any record.

This person however, really did exist -- but does this mean that since there is no absolute, tangible evidence, that this person never did exist even though he did??

[Boris Godunov]

Do you think Santa Claus exists? We have lots of writings about him...surely he must be real!

The point you're missing is that for someone who supposedly had such a dramatic impact on the world around him, the complete lack of contemporary documentation is eye-raising, at the very least. This man supposedly had all of Judea in such an uproar that the ruling elite wanted him dead, and the Romans were afraid of the trouble enough to comply with their wishes. Yet no Jewish or Roman writings document these events outside of the possibly apocryphal gospels. Now, there are some convenient explanations for why those documents might have been lost, but it's still a little strange. I think it certainly indicates there's a lot of exaggeration of the significance of the events in the gospels, if Jesus was real.

On top of that, you can find earlier accounts of prophets resembling the Jesus mythology that indicate it was derivative of those earlier figures, perhaps an amalgam of several different people (Yeshua, mentioned in the Torah IIRC, being one of them). This gives people reason to believe that Jesus as described in the gospels is fiction.

Regardless, the your categorization as people who think there wasn't an historical Jesus as "morons" was clearly unfounded. Since you've been unable to provide any evidence asked for, I'll take that as a concession.

[tinyp3nis]

Superman however, really does exist -- but does this mean that since there is no absolute, tangible evidence, that Superman doesn't exist even though he does??
edit: i'm so slow

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Do you think Santa Claus exists? We have lots of writings about him...surely he must be real!

The point you're missing is that for someone who supposedly had such a dramatic impact on the world around him, the complete lack of contemporary documentation is eye-raising, at the very least. This man supposedly had all of Judea in such an uproar that the ruling elite wanted him dead, and the Romans were afraid of the trouble enough to comply with their wishes. Yet no Jewish or Roman writings document these events outside of the possibly apocryphal gospels. Now, there are some convenient explanations for why those documents might have been lost, but it's still a little strange. I think it certainly indicates there's a lot of exaggeration of the significance of the events in the gospels, if Jesus was real.

On top of that, you can find earlier accounts of prophets resembling the Jesus mythology that indicate it was derivative of those earlier figures, perhaps an amalgam of several different people (Yeshua, mentioned in the Torah IIRC, being one of them). This gives people reason to believe that Jesus as described in the gospels is fiction.

Regardless, the your categorization as people who think there wasn't an historical Jesus as "morons" was clearly unfounded. Since you've been unable to provide any evidence asked for, I'll take that as a concession.

Tonight, I will try to locate a reputable source that provides strong-possible evidence that Jesus was a real person.

But I was out of line when I used the word "moron."

[Boris Godunov]

You're welcome to try, but such evidence has been hunted for in vain for centuries. I somehow doubt you'll succeed where so many thousands upon thousands have failed, especially from Illinois...

[Ben Kenobi]

And no one's stopping people from being Christians by not putting up certain decorations at school.

True, but you are preventing them from practicing if other religions are allowed to put up such displays.

So either you have all of them, or none of them.

Regardless of what you call it, it still amounts to a Christmas holiday.

Tell that to my school. They avoid any Christian associations with their winter holiday.

And Christians from the US generally don't stop working for an entire month surrounding Christmas (in my experience).

But Christmas is not a month-long holiday, compared to Ramadan. Interesting that you admit many Moslems in Moslem countries do not stop working during Ramadan.

[Boris Godunov]

I'm certainly perplexed as to how the Menorah is considered a "secular" display:

http://www.jewfaq.org/signs.htm

Menorah
One of the oldest symbols of the Jewish faith is the menorah, a seven-branched candelabrum used in the Temple. The kohanim lit the menorah in the Sanctuary every evening and cleaned it out every morning, replacing the wicks and putting fresh olive oil into the cups. The illustration at left is based on instructions for construction of the menorah found in Ex. 25:31-40.

It has been said that the menorah is a symbol of the nation of Israel and our mission to be "a light unto the nations." (Isaiah 42:6). The sages emphasize that light is not a violent force; Israel is to accomplish its mission by setting an example, not by using force. This idea is highlighted in the vision in Zechariah 4:1-6. Zechariah sees a menorah, and G-d explains: "Not by might, nor by power, but by My spirit."

The lamp stand in today's synagogues, called the ner tamid (lit. the continual light, usually translated as the eternal flame), symbolizes the menorah.

The nine-branched menorah used on Chanukkah is commonly patterned after this menorah, because Chanukkah commemorates the miracle that a day's worth of oil for this menorah lasted eight days.

[Ben Kenobi]

Wow!

This thread exploded.

If we're citing websites, I'll have to wait until I get home to properly refute those arguments.

UR:

The NT has an abysmal record for historical accuracy. There are also no indications that they are what they assert, that they were written by eyewitnesses.

UR:

Neither of these assertions are true. The variations between each of the synoptic Gospels indicate reliance on difference sources. If they were perfect copies of each other, this would prove a serious blow to any theory of eyewitness testimony, since all eyewitnesses will not see the same things about an event as having the same importance.

Now, as for abysmal historical accuracy, it must surely be more than the date of the census, which I will argue later did occur just as said in the Bible. Which other parts of the testimony show 'abysmal' accuracy?