8
   

Was Jesus a Historical Figure?

 
 
Kenson
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 10:41 am
4 BCE - 66 CE - when Herod the Great dies, his kingdom is divided between three surviving sons & one sister (see chart of Herodian Dynasty):
4 BCE - 6 CE - Herod Archelaus rules as "Ethnarch" of Judea, Idumea, Samaria
6-66 CE - Judea, Idumea, Samaria under direct rule of Roman Procurators (e.g. Pontius Pilate), responsible to the Governors in Syria; various political/resistance movements form (Zealots, Sicarii, etc.), with some small-scale revolts
4 BCE - 33 CE - Herod Philip rules as "Tetrarch" of regions North-East of the Sea of Galilee
4 BCE - 39 CE - Herod Antipas rules as "Tetrarch" of Galilee and Perea
ca. 27-30 CE - preaching of John the Baptist and public ministry of Jesus, both mostly in Galilee and Perea
ca. 29/30 CE - arrest, crucifixion & death of Jesus, while Pontius Pilate (26-36 CE) is Procurator of Judea
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 11:17 am
Consider the case of Sir William Ramsay, a noted historian who set out on a journey to prove that the Book of Acts was fiction, and was converted to Christianity in the process:

http://apologetiks.com/archaeology/sir-william-ramsay/

Quote:
.... “… [A]bout 1880 to 1890 the book of the Acts was regarded as the weakest part of the New Testament. No one that had any regard for his reputation as a scholar cared to say a word in its defence. The most conservative of theological scholars, as a rule, thought the wisest plan of defence for the New Testament as a whole was to say as little as possible about the Acts.”[1]

It was his dislike for Acts that launched him into a Mid-East adventure. With Bible-in-hand, he made a trip to the Holy Land. What William found, however, was not what he expected…

As it turns out, ‘ole Willy’ changed his mind. After his extensive study he concluded that Luke was one of the world’s greatest historians:

The more I have studied the narrative of the Acts, and the more I have learned year after year about Graeco-Roman society and thoughts and fashions, and organization in those provinces, the more I admire and the better I understand. I set out to look for truth on the borderland where Greece and Asia meet, and found it here [in the Book of Acts"KB]. You may press the words of Luke in a degree beyond any other historian’s, and they stand the keenest scrutiny and the hardest treatment, provided always that the critic knows the subject and does not go beyond the limits of science and of justice.[2]

Skeptics were strikingly shocked. In ‘Evidence that Demands a Verdict’ Josh Mcdowell writes,

“The book caused a furor of dismay among the skeptics of the world. Its attitude was utterly unexpected because it was contrary to the announced intention of the author years before…. for twenty years more, book after book from the same author came from the press, each filled with additional evidence of the exact, minute truthfulness of the whole New Testament as tested by the spade on the spot. The evidence was so overwhelming that many infidels announced their repudiation of their former unbelief and accepted Christianity. And these books have stood the test of time, not one having been refuted, nor have I found even any attempt to refute them.”[3]....
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 11:17 am
@BillRM,
Lord I cover why there is a mountain of evidences already concerning Alexandra the Great and anyone who care to can go to that posting along with googling the name and reading about the man.

You are setting up a course in history with no knowledge of histroy it would seem.

I have no idea how many of the readers of this thread have a basic knowledge of history however for those who do you had just discredit yourself completely if you had not done so before this last posting of your.


0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 11:28 am
Bill is floundering around badly here, so i figured he needs some help.

The evidence for Alexander III of Macedon (usually referred to as Alexander "the Great") is to be found in numerous contemporary references--no such contemporary references exist for the putative Jesus. A dozen cities were founded named Alexandria by him and in his own honor--no such events pertain to the putative Jesus. Near contemporary biographies of him exist, which do not disagree in anything other than that some contain detail which others do not--the "gospels" contradict one another in more than one place, most notoriously in the matter of the "genealogy" of the putative Jesus. The biographies of Alexander do no violence to any other historical accounts of the period, where as the "gospels" and early church history are full of an incredible amount of historical horseshit--c.f. the alleged census of Caesar Augustus, which is flatly contradicted by the extant account which Augustus himself provided of each census and lustrum which he conducted in his reign. There are monumental inscriptions dedicated to Alexander which date to immediately after the monumental inscriptions dedicated to the Achaemenid Persian emperors, especially those dedicated to Darius III, the last Persian emperor whom he defeated. There are no contemporary or even near contemporary monumental inscriptions dedicated to the putative Jesus. There are, of course, contemporary portraits of Alexander III of Macedon--no such portraits of the putative Jesus exist.

But i would be at pains to point out that i have no idea of whether or not the putative Jesus actually existed--only that there is no reliable contemporary evidence that he existed. The evidence for the existence of Alexander III of Macedon is overwhelming by comparison.

http://www.graysantiques.com/resources/2023.jpg

A silver tetradrachma (four drachma coin) minted in 323 BCE, the year of Alexander's death.

http://rg.ancients.info/alexander/Tet_Amphilpolis_P78_herm_o.jpg

Silver tetradrachma minted in Macedonia between 325 and 323 BCE, which is to say, in Alexander's lifetime.

http://rg.ancients.info/alexander/Tet_Tarsos_o.jpg

Silver tetradrachma mined in Asia Minor circa 333 to 327 BCE, which is to say, in Alexander's lifetime.

http://rg.ancients.info/alexander/Tet_Memphis_o.jpg

Silver tetradrachma minted in Egypt circa 332 to 323 BCE, which is to day, in Alexander's lifetime.

http://rg.ancients.info/alexander/Stater_lifetime.jpg

Gold stater mined in Asia Minor circa 328 to 323 BCE, which is to say, in Alexander's lifetime.

http://rg.ancients.info/alexander/Bronze_arrow_case_r.jpg

A bronze hemiobol (half an obol) minted in Madeconia circa 336 to 323 BCE, which is to say, in Alexander's lifetime.

http://rg.ancients.info/alexander/Bronze_bow_case_o.jpg

A bronze hemiobol minted in Asia Minor circa 336 to 323 BCE, which is to say, in Alexander's lifetime.

All of these coins are inscribed "of Alexander," meaning that they were minted and issued under Alexander's authority.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 11:44 am
@Kenson,
Your post is patently false, Kenson. The name of the "province" was Iudaea (did you use a holy roller site for that crap you posted?), which was actually a prefecture of the province of Syria. It was not governed by procurators in the period 6-66 CE, because the office didn't exist at that time. The "governors" of Iudaea were prefects, and that has been confirmed by the "Pilate" inscription found at site of Caesarea Maritima by the Israelis in 1961.

http://www.ichthus.info/CaseForChrist/Archeology/Supporting/pilate_ins9.jpg

The inscription reads:

IBERIEUM
TIUS PILATUS
ECTUS IUDA

Which implies "Tiberieum Pontius Pilatus Preafectus Idudaeae," meaning that the small coliseum in which it was found was dedicated to the emperor Tiberius by Pontius Pilate, the Prefect of Iudeaa.

You really shouldn't post bullshit when you obviously don't know what the hell you're talking about. The office of procurator was created by the emperor Trajan, sometime after 98 CE--it did not exist in the period 6-66 CE.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 12:09 pm
@Foxfyre,
Why oh why am I bothering with someone with no idea of history however for the fun of it had you hear of Alexandria as in the city or Alexandria as in the great library of and do you think that there is not solid proof that they exist either?

Had you hear of Cleopatra and do you think that there is proof that she was a real woman or not? She was the great granddaughter of one of Alexandra the Great main Lieutenants and on and on it go.

A mountain of solid proof of the man being a living breathing human with a footprint that cover a large part of the known world. Hell he even campaign with scholars who recorded his actions.

You are not fit to produce a child coloring book concerning history let alone a course for adults. You better hope that not one of the people who review your work have a background in history.

0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 12:20 pm
@Setanta,
Setanta thanks I did not think of coins when you have one of the greatest cities ever founded that ended up being one of the great intellectual centers of the world for many centuries just to start with.

Off hand I can not come up with a historic figure with more proof that he was a living breathing human in the history of the human race.

0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 12:24 pm
Hey I haven't questioned the existence of Alexander nor have I challenged that there is more to prove his existence than there is to support Jesus. Alexander is credited with conquering a very large chunk of the known world at that time, and it is understandable that he would be largely mentioned in writings of that time.

But how about Aristotle and Plato? Same era. How do you prove they were real and not made up by somebody wishing to further a dogma or idea?

But if coinage is proof conclusive of the existence of various historical figures, here are some 3rd Century (BC) Roman coins depicting images of some of their gods:
Mars
http://www.dig4coins.com/images/stories/articles/ancient_coins/gold_coin_240_to_229_bc.JPG

Romulus, son of Mars, who founded Rome
http://www.dig4coins.com/images/stories/articles/ancient_coins/gold_coin_240_to_229_bc_reverse.JPG

Janus
http://www.dig4coins.com/images/stories/articles/ancient_coins/aes_grave_222_to_205_bc_obverse.JPG

And . . . . .
Coins depicting Jesus issued by 3rd (AD) century Roman emperors.
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/Coins/19797p00.jpg
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/Coins2/33684p00.jpg
http://www.forumancientcoins.com/Coins2/33751p00.jpg

So far as we know, Jesus never travelled more than 50 miles from his home, never marshalled an army, was never a head of state, never conquered anybody, and was not known outside of his immediate area until after his death. But the sources already named earlier in the thread apparently believed he existed....at least they did if you assume that they existed.

And the incredible influence his existence would have on those who followed him is pretty well unprecedented in its rapid developed, its scope, breadth, and staying power.

So again, I accept that you guys don't believe he was God or divine or anything at all. Why is he so threatening? Why is it so important to you that he not have existed?
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 12:31 pm
I have no inclination one way or the other re an historical jesus but I am inclined to think that socrates was a fictional creation of plato.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 12:50 pm
Quote:
Hey I haven't questioned the existence of Alexander nor have I challenged that there is more to prove his existence than there is to support Jesus.


Liar . . .

In your post #3650110 . . .

You wrote:
Why are you convinced that evidence of Alexander is more reliable than that of Jesus?


In that post, you also wrote . . .

Quote:
Or do you trust the archaeological evidence, written histories, and testimonies of his feats and accomplishments based on faith alone?


The archaeological evidence for Alexander is contemporary to him--what archaeological evidence is there for your boy Jesus which is contemporary to him?

Then you wrote . . .

Quote:
The argument for the existence of Jesus already laid out in this thread is as compelling and as reasonable as are the stories of Plato, Aristotle, and Alexander.


Nonsense . . . every bit of "evidence" you have come up with has been seriously questioned and challenged. What serious challenges do you have for the evidence of the existence of Alexander III of Macedon?

Of the coins you show show, three depict Mars, Romulus and Janus. Those figures are not represented as authorizing the minting and issue of the coins. The coins of Alexander which i showed are all inscribed "of Alexander," meaning in the practice of the day (used by his father Philip II and their predecessors) that Alexander authorized the minting and issue of those coins. The coins you show with Christian motifs are not contemporary to the putative Jesus.

Apples and Oranges, Church Lady.

Your sources mentioned earlier in this thread either don't support a claim that Jesus ever existed (Tacitus and Pliny), or they are questioned as interpolation (Flavius Josephus and Tactitus).

Tediously, allow me to repeat that i don't know (or care) if the putative Jesus existed or not, i just know that there is no reliable contemporary evidence for the claim.

By the way, Tacitus (circa 57 CE to circa 117 CE), Flavius Josephus (37 CE to 100 CE) and Pliny the Younger (61 CE to 112 CE) were none of them contemporaries of the putative Jesus.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 01:14 pm
@Setanta,
We are running into the willingness of some to lie for Jesus.

And like you I have no idea if such a man exist or did not exist however there is little indication that he was a living human in the records of the time period.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 06:23 pm
One explanation for so little documentation of biblical figures actually existing might be because their earthly lives may have been within the confines of their own special clique. Only after death did their followers gain success in converting the masses, and then the story retold could have given their lives a more dramatic technicolor image. Surely, anyone that could have been Moses was not a look alike for that actor that was in the movie version (Charleton Heston?).
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 06:34 pm
I have already had my say about Jesus. However. There is a website that delves into ancient history in an interesting way. This article is about Moses and Joseph. I am posting a link. The home page can be found by clicking the link at the page bottom.

http://home-3.tiscali.nl/~meester7/engmoses.html
0 Replies
 
glitterbag
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 10:38 pm
It might be helpful getting a copy of "Misquoting Jesus" written by a scholar who believes he had a born again experience. The experience made him delve deeply into his church's teachings and also to learn Greek and Aramaic (sp) in order to read the earliest bible writings in the original language. Very interesting, compelling actually. Or you could just rent a copy of "The Life of Brian" to support other beliefs.
saab
 
  1  
Reply Thu 14 May, 2009 11:56 pm
@glitterbag,
Just because you had a born again experience should not really be a reason to study Greek and Aramaic as the mainstream churches do not talk about born again experiences.
Theologians - language scientists study Semitic languages - Aramaic and Syriac
at universities not only to be able to read the Bible but also to study other litterature.
You can study these languages at many universities - even in Uppsala, Sweden.
Theologians/researchers study Semitic languages, Hebrew, Greek and Latin to be able to study the Bible and and also find translation mistakes.
The three wise Kings have after great studies been changed to The three wise men or even better the three astrologists.
saab
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 May, 2009 12:18 am
@saab,
Studying Bible translations is not that easy. Usually a group of theologians, language scientists and historians get together.
The Bible was translated from Latin into German and English and from there into other languages. Mistakes were made - it is not that easy to translate especially if you lack a certain knowledge about the history of the country where things take place.
You have to know the meaning of words and how they were used in the 15th century to get the right word for today.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 May, 2009 05:23 am
@saab,
In fact, the Protestants after 1520 commissioned new translations of the bible in several places. The most notable example in English is the King James version, commission by James I and VI (James I of England and James VI of Scotland, 1603-1625 on his English throne). It was translated from Greek and Hebrew sources. Precisely because of their suspicion of the Roman church, Protestants did not want scripture which had merely been translated from medieval church Latin.
saab
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 May, 2009 05:47 am
@Setanta,
Now there are also bibles which are not "translated" but rewritten to fit certain denominations.
The Bible used in the Lutheran Church of Sweden has recently been rewritten and partly with new translations. All done by linguistic people - no theologians at all in the group. First the theologians were offended by this, but after the result came out almost everybody agree on this was the right thing to do.
The message has not been lost and the language is as close as it can be to the original.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 May, 2009 12:51 pm
A somewhat related article wrote:

FORMER FUNDAMENTALIST 'DEBUNKS' BIBLE

CNN -- Just so you know, Bart Ehrman says he's not the anti-Christ.

Bart Ehrman says most of the New Testament is a forgery but it's still an important body of work.

He says he's not trying to destroy your faith. He's not trying to bash the Bible. And, though his mother no longer talks to him about religion, Ehrman says some of his best friends are Christian.

Ehrman, a best-selling author and a professor of religious studies at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, is a biblical sleuth whose investigations make some people very angry. Like the fictional Robert Langdon character played by actor Tom Hanks in the movie "Angels & Demons," he delves into the past to challenge some of Christianity's central claims.

In Ehrman's latest book, "Jesus, Interrupted," he concludes:

Doctrines such as the divinity of Jesus and heaven and hell are not based on anything Jesus or his earlier followers said.

At least 19 of the 27 books in the New Testament are forgeries.

Believing the Bible is infallible is not a condition for being a Christian.

The source can be found here....
0 Replies
 
glitterbag
 
  1  
Reply Fri 15 May, 2009 02:50 pm
To Saab. Of course you don't have to be born again or Christian or anything to study languages...but you do know, I assume, that Greek was also used in earlier renditions, say 60 AD. For further clarification, check your local library for ancient copies of The Jerusalam Twon Crier. All will be explained.
 

Related Topics

HAPPY ANNIVERSARY, EVERYONE! - Discussion by OmSigDAVID
WIND AND WATER - Discussion by Setanta
Who ordered the construction of the Berlin Wall? - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
True version of Vlad Dracula, 15'th century - Discussion by gungasnake
ONE SMALL STEP . . . - Discussion by Setanta
History of Gun Control - Discussion by gungasnake
Where did our notion of a 'scholar' come from? - Discussion by TuringEquivalent
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 01/06/2025 at 04:30:47