The Historical Jesus III

[Leumas]

Dear fellow laymen observe a sample of chicanery for Jesus' sake!

Lest you be like me utterly , please ignore all this wrangling about an E instead of an I and vice versa.

It is ironical that atheists in the 21st century are quibbling about a letter MUCH LIKE Christians

Dear fellow laymen... please read the following posts if you wish to have some clarity and at least try to watch the videos ...

No thinking. no quibbling. No wrangling. Scholarship is nonsense. Watch the videos.

Aye, right.

The above disingenuous misquotation of this post of mine is a very VIVID demonstration of the kind of chicanery and skullduggery that Jesus fans have been deploying in their casuistic and apologetic lies for Jesus' sake throughout the ages.

The above is a deliberate misquotation artfully done in a very subtle manner to achieve a crafty and subtle straw manning.

It is an example of the FORGERY and dissimulation TECHNIQUES that have been used throughout the ages for Jesus' sake.

The quote was slyly clipped and DISTROTED to appear to be saying something I did not say.

Of course this is in order to fabricate a straw man which then can be readily ridiculed and mocked for Jesus' sake.

Here, compare his version of what he would like me to appear to have said with what I actually said.

I am going to list his version of the quotation with explanations in blue for what he cunningly and deliberately left out in the fabrication of a flimsy straw man.

Then I will list my ACTUAL REAL post with highlights to show how what he clipped makes all the difference in the light of his snides above

Lest you be like me utterly , please ignore all this wrangling about an E instead of an I and vice versa.

It is ironical that atheists in the 21st century are quibbling about a letter MUCH LIKE Christians [left out the rest of this paragraph (see below) without any indication that he did so]

[left out a paragraph in its entirety (see below) without any indication whatsoever that he did so]

Dear fellow laymen... please read the following posts if you wish to have some clarity and at least try to watch the videos ... [artful and sly clipping of the rest of this paragraph which tells people to read the books. This of course makes it look like I am only asking people to watch videos. Hence the straw man can now be snidely ridiculed for telling people not to think and only watch videos.]

Now here is the original post with the craftily and deliberately omitted bits in highlights

Lest you be like me utterly , please ignore all this wrangling about an E instead of an I and vice versa.

It is ironical that atheists in the 21st century are quibbling about a letter MUCH LIKE Christians were in the 3rd century (see this post quoted below).
Fortunately they are not killing each other (although some would love to perform lobotomies on some) in droves like the Christians did back then and continued to do for centuries after until one sect managed to get enough BRIGANDS and KILLERS and ROYAL PROSTITUTES to support their version of the ONE LETTER DIFFERENCE in their fairy tales.
Dear fellow laymen... please read the following posts if you wish to have some clarity and at least try to watch the videos in this post and if you can read one of the books listed there....

Typical wily huckstering and dissimulation all for the sake of Jesus.

Can you now see what I mean about the whole Jesus CULT right from the onset having been nothing but lies for Jesus' sake... much like any other cult fabricated by any of the men in the post quoted below.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=10790718#post10790718

Edited by Agatha: 

replaced quoted post with a link to original

 

[Leumas]

I notice that our correspondent is now referring to Tacitus's writings as "fairy tales" as it appears that they fall outside the Orthodoxy.

Is this some more lies for Jesus' sake? Citation please!!!

 

[The Greater Fool]

<snipped to highlight specific thoughts>
The above disingenuous misquotation...
The above is a deliberate misquotation artfully done in a very subtle manner to achieve a crafty and subtle straw manning...
The quote was slyly clipped and DISTROTED to appear to be saying something I did not say.

Note that certain Fundamental Atheists, right here on this forum, employ this same tactic. Disgusting tactic, is it not?

Of course this is in order to fabricate a straw man which then can be readily ridiculed and mocked for Jesus' sake.

And some Fundamental Atheists do this exact same thing. To what depths do people plunge to advance their dogma!

Can you now see what I mean about the whole Jesus CULT right from the onset having been nothing but lies for Jesus' sake... much like any other cult fabricated by any of the men in the post quoted below.

I wonder what excuse Fundamental Atheists claim for doing the same despicable acts to forward "true" atheism.

To bad people can't rely on the strength of their argument, rather than plunge the depths of deceit and name calling.

Keep up the good fight!

 

[dejudge]

Once there were multiple heretical cults called Chrestianos or Christianos who did not believe the Jesus stories then the mention of ChrEstianos/ChrIstianos cannot prove that there was an historical Jesus or that there was a Jesus cult in the 1st century.

Something is radically wrong with those who argue for an HJ using an 11th century copy of Tacitus' Annals when the passage does not identify any person called Jesus and the authenticity/non-authenticity of the passage cannot show that there was an HJ.

Tacitus believed that myth characters like Romulus of Rome who was born of a Ghost and a Virgin like Jesus of Nazareth did actually exist.

1. Tacitus' Annals III ---Romulus governed us as he pleased....

2. Tacitus' Annals IV... Romulus, Rome's founder.....

3. Tacitus' Annals VI ---It is said that Denter Romulius was appointed by Romulus

4. Tacitus' Annals XII --- Still, I think, it is interesting to know accurately the original plan of the precinct, as it was fixed by Romulus.

5. Tacitus Annals XV-- Those with the oldest ceremonial, as that dedicated by Servius Tullius to Luna, the great altar and shrine raised by the Arcadian Evander to the visibly appearing Hercules, the temple of Jupiter the Stayer, which was vowed by Romulus

Tacitus' Annals is completely useless to argue for HJ.

Tacitus believed Greek/Roman myth Ghost stories were historical accounts.

Tacitus accepted Greek/Roman mythology as history and not only Romulus but Numa, Jupiter, Mars, Diana, Apollo, Hercules and other myth/fiction characters.

 

[tsig]

No he mentioned Christus who suffered the extreme penalty under pontius, and whose followers were called Christians, and the reference is considered authentic and authoritative by the vast majority of(Christian) scholars, but I am just going to go ahead and take your word for it.....

(FTFY)

 

[The Big Dog]

Is this some more lies for Jesus' sake? Citation please!!!

Fortunately they are not killing each other (although some would love to perform lobotomies on some) in droves like the Christians did back then and continued to do for centuries after until one sect managed to get enough BRIGANDS and KILLERS and ROYAL PROSTITUTES to support their version of the ONE LETTER DIFFERENCE in their fairy tales.
!

The one letter difference is in Tacitus, leumas.

 

[The Big Dog]

How devoted does one have to be to one's anti-theism to throw one of Antiquity's greatest historians completely under the bus because he mentioned Christ?

Zealots gonna zeal!

 

[dejudge]

The one letter difference is in Tacitus, leumas.

One letter??

Does anyone here know how to spell "JESUS" in Greek or Latin??

Does anyone here know how to spell "the ANOINTED" in Greek or Latin??

It is most fascinating that people here see what they imagine.

 

[Leumas]

How devoted does one have to be to one's anti-theism to throw one of Antiquity's greatest historians completely under the bus because he mentioned Christ?

Zealots gonna zeal!

I know... I personally want the GREAT Tacitus' passage made required reading in all churches and in all schools and carved on tablets and erected in front of courthouses throughout the Christian world.

I personally LOVE Tacitus' passage and I would LOVE for it to be totally authentic and nary a forgery in it. But even if it is a Christian forgery, the Christian forger who did it really understood his religion quite well and only told the truth about it.

I mean what's not to LOVE about this great historian's very apt and truthful description of Christianity... he summed up what Christianity is all about in such wonderfully HISTORIC WORDS.

I agree totally with the ca. 116 CE historic description Tacitus made about Christianity being the MOST MISCHIEVOUS SUPERSTITION and that their HIDEOUS and SHAMEFUL EVIL beliefs were HATEFUL of humanity.

Tacitus obviously got his information about anything Christian from the Christian jihadist zealots CULTISTS of his era. So it is utterly useless for anyone trying to extrude and wring out some information about Jesus from it since it is nothing but hearsay from criminal cultists about their sky daddy generations after the fabrication of the Jesus fairy tale in the Buybull. But yet his description is quite historically ACCURATE and describes so perfectly the Christian ethos.

I mean I am so happy that the Christian cultists never managed to destroy it. If it were not for the morbid lust for jihad martyrdom that early Christian cultists had, they probably would have tried their darnedest to erase this passage from history. But it looks like they couldn't have been able to since they did not even modify it.

Tacitus must have been quite an intelligent and prescient bloke. I must say he summed up Christianity quite nicely; it is amazing how timeless his comments are!

"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[/B][/HILITE]. 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".
​

 

[dejudge]

The ASSUMED obscure historical JESUS did not start any new religion in Judea.

The ASSUMED obscure historical Jesus was crucified because he started a Fracas at the Jewish Temple.

Tacitus' Annals does not mention OBSCURE HJ from Nazareth.

The Jesus cult religion never broke out in Rome until the 4th century.

 

[Mcreal]

How devoted does one have to be to one's anti-theism to throw one of Antiquity's greatest historians completely under the bus because he mentioned Christ?

"completely under the bus" ??

Hardly.

But why Annals 15.44 (and possibly all of Annals) is not mentioned by anyone before the 14th century is relevant.

As is it's alignment with the Chronicle of Sulpicius Severus.

Which Arthur Drews addressed in 1912 in his book the Witnesses to the Historicity of Jesus -

there is the complete silence of profane writers and the vagueness of the Christian writers on the matter; the latter only gradually come to make a definite statement of a general 'persecution' of the Christians under Nero, whereas at first they make Nero put to death only Peter and Paul. The first unequivocal mention of the 'Neronian persecution' in connection with the burning of Rome is found in the forged correspondence of Seneca and the apostle Paul, which belongs to the fourth century. A fuller 'account' is then given in the Chronicle of Sulpicius Severus (died 403 A.D.), but it is mixed with the most transparent Christian legends, such as the story of the death of Simon Magus, the bishopric and sojourn of Peter at Rome, etc. The expressions of Sulpicius agree, in part, almost word for word with those of Tacitus. It is, however, very doubtful, in view of the silence of the other Christian authors who used Tacitus, if the manuscript of Tacitus which Sulpicius used contained the passage in question. We are therefore strongly disposed to suspect that the passage (Annals, xv, 44) was transferred from Sulpicius to the text of Tacitus by the hand of a monastic copyist or forger, for the greater glory of God and in order to strengthen the 'truth' of the Christian tradition by a pagan witness [ie. Tacitus].

https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Witnesses_to_the_Historicity_of_Jesus/Part_2/Section_2

Moreover, Drews said

The expression “Christians,” which Tacitus applies to the followers of Jesus, was by no means common in the time of Nero. Not a single Greek or Roman writer of the first century mentions the name: neither Juvenal nor Persius, Lucian or Martial, the older Pliny or Seneca. Even Dio Cassius never uses it, and his abbreviator, the monk Xiphilinus, sees no reason to break his silence, but speaks of the Christians who were persecuted under Domitian as followers of the Jewish religion.^[61] The Christians, .. called .. Jessaeans, or Nazoraeans, the Elect, the Saints, the Faithful, etc., were universally regarded as Jews. They observed the Mosaic law, and the people could not distinguish them from the other Jews.

That Tacitus applied the name, common in his time, to the Jewish sectaries under Nero, as Voltaire and Gibbon believe, is very improbable. The Greek word Christus (“the anointed”) for Messiah, and the derivative word Christian, first came into use under Trajan, in the time of Tacitus. Even then, however, the word Christus could not mean Jesus of Nazareth. All the Jews without exception looked forward to a Christus or Messiah, and believed that his coming was near at hand. It is, therefore, not clear how the fact of being a “Christian” could, in the time of Nero or of Tacitus, distinguish the followers of Jesus from other believers in a Christus or Messiah.

Not one of the evangelists applies the name Christians to the followers of Jesus. It is never used in the New Testament as a description of themselves by the believers in Jesus, and the relevant passage in Acts (xi, 26), according to which the name was first used at Antioch, has the appearance of a later interpolation, belonging to a time when the term had become a name of honour in the eyes of some and a name of reproach in the eyes of others.

 

[Mcreal]

Here is Sulpicius Severus's Chronicle (of Sacred History) Bk 2, Chap. 29 (c. 403)

In the meantime, the number of the Christians being now very large, it happened that Rome was destroyed by fire, while Nero was stationed at Antium. But the opinion of all cast the odium of causing the fire upon the emperor, and he was believed in this way to have sought for the glory of building a new city. And in fact, Nero could not by any means he tried escape from the charge that the fire had been caused by his orders. He therefore turned the accusation against the Christians, and the most cruel tortures were accordingly inflicted upon the innocent. Nay, even new kinds of death were invented, so that, being covered in the skins of wild beasts, they perished by being devoured by dogs, while many were crucified or slain by fire, and not a few were set apart for this purpose, that, when the day came to a close, they should be consumed to serve for light during the night. In this way, cruelty first began to be manifested against the Christians. Afterwards, too, their religion was prohibited by laws which were enacted; and by edicts openly set forth it was proclaimed unlawful to be a Christian. At that time Paul and Peter were condemned to death, the former being beheaded with a sword, while Peter suffered crucifixion. And while these things went on at Rome, the Jews, not able to endure the injuries they suffered under the rule of Festus Florus, began to rebel. Vespasian, being sent by Nero against them, with proconsular power, defeated them in numerous important battles, and compelled them to flee within the walls of Jerusalem. In the meanwhile Nero, now hateful even to himself from a consciousness of his crimes, disappears from among men, leaving it uncertain whether or not he had laid violent hands upon himself: certainly his body was never found. It was accordingly believed that, even if he did put an end to himself with a sword, his wound was cured, and his life preserved, according to that which was written regarding him—And his mortal wound was healed,— to be sent forth again near the end of the world, in order that he may practice the mystery of iniquity. http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/35052.htm

The chief work of Severus is the Chronicle (Chronica, Chronicorum Libri duo or Historia sacra, c. 403), a summary of sacred history from the beginning of the world to his own times, with the omission of the events recorded in the Gospels and the Acts, "lest the form of his brief work should detract from the honour due to those events". It is a source of primary importance for the history of Priscillianism and contains considerable information respecting the Arian controversy. The book was a textbook, and was used as such in the schools of Europe for about a century and a half after the editio princeps was published by Flacius Illyricus in 1556.

Severus nowhere clearly points to the class of readers for whom his book is designed. He disclaims the intention of making his work a substitute for the actual narrative contained in the Bible. "Worldly historians" had been used by him, he says, to make clear the dates and the connexion of events and for supplementing the sacred sources, and with the intent at once to instruct the unlearned and to "convince" the learned.

Sources
The text of the Chronicle rests on a single 11th century MS., one of the Palatine collection now in the Vatican.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulpicius_Severus

 

[The Big Dog]

I know... I personally want the GREAT Tacitus' passage made required reading in all churches and in all schools and carved on tablets and erected in front of courthouses throughout the Christian world.

I personally LOVE Tacitus' passage and I would LOVE for it to be totally authentic and nary a forgery in it.

I mean what's not to LOVE about this great historian's very apt and truthful description of Christianity... he summed up what Christianity is all about in such wonderfully HISTORIC WORDS.

I agree totally with the ca. 116 CE historic description Tacitus made about Christianity being the MOST MISCHIEVOUS SUPERSTITION and that their HIDEOUS and SHAMEFUL EVIL beliefs were HATEFUL of humanity.

I mean I am so happy that Christians never managed to destroy it. If it were not for the morbid lust for jihad martyrdom that early Christians had, they probably would have tried their darnedest to erase this passage from history. But it looks like they couldn't have been able to since they did not even modify it.

Tacitus must have been quite an intelligent and prescient bloke. I must say he summed up Christianity quite nicely; it is amazing how timeless his comments are!

"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[/B][/HILITE]. 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".
​

Fantastic, tacitus authentic and authoritative! Now we are getting somewhere!

Now we have confirmed the reference to Christ who suffered the extreme penalty under Pilate.

It is indeed unfortunate that you have chosen to celebrate the comments that reflected the extraordinary prejudice against the Christians shown under Nero. Thankfully not all Roman emperors were as insane as Nero!

 

[dejudge]

Fantastic, tacitus authentic and authoritative! Now we are getting somewhere!

Fantastic!!!! Tacitus' Annals mentions Romulus. We are getting somewhere!!

We have confirmed Tacitus believed myth characters and ghost stories were historical accounts.

Christus was born of a Ghost like Romulus.

Now we have confirmed the reference to Christ who suffered the extreme penalty under Pilate.

We have not confirmed that the 11th century copy of Tacitus' Annals refers to an assumed historical Jesus who was crucified because he started a fracas at the Jewish Temple.

Tacitus' Annals has been conclusively proven to have been corrupted.

 

[maximara]

"completely under the bus" ??

Hardly.

But why Annals 15.44 (and possibly all of Annals) is not mentioned by anyone before the 14th century is relevant.

As is it's alignment with the Chronicle of Sulpicius Severus.

Which Arthur Drews addressed in 1912 in his book the Witnesses to the Historicity of Jesus

That work also has several other interesting points:

"Clearly, the expression must, when we examine their way of thinking, be regarded as ironical ; the Roman people called the followers of Serapis-Chrestus "good" because they were precisely the contrary."

"Vopiscusin the letter of the Emperor Hadrian to his brother-in-law Servius: "Those who worship Serapis are the Chrestians, and those who call themselves priests of Chrestus are devoted to Serapis. There is not a high-priest of the Jews, a Samaritan, or a priest of Chrestus who is not a mathematician, soothsayer, or quack. Even the patriarch, when he goes to Egypt, is compelled by some to worship Serapis, by others to worship Chrestus. They are a turbulent, inflated, lawless body of men. They have only one God, who is worshipped by the Chrestians, the Jews, and all the peoples of Egypt."

As I have mentioned before we see the "Chrstus" in the Annals is sometimes rendered as Chrestus rather then Christ and this tends to occur when the author is trying to make Suetonius' reference to Chrestus look more relevant.

So one can't accuse Drews or mucking about with "Chrstus" because even scholars today will render that as Chrestus rather then Christ.

"Moreover, in the sixteenth century Vossius had a manuscript of the text of Josephus in which there was not a word about Jesus."

 

[Leumas]

Fantastic, tacitus authentic and authoritative! Now we are getting somewhere!

Now we have confirmed the reference to Christ who suffered the extreme penalty under Pilate.
It is indeed unfortunate that you have chosen to celebrate the comments that reflected the extraordinary prejudice against the Christians shown under Nero. Thankfully not all Roman emperors were as insane as Nero!

We have confirmed no such thing!

All we have confirmed is that Christian jihadist zealots cultists believed that... much like UFO nutters believe that the President is an alien ET... or like morons who believe in cutting the throats of chickens and dancing around sprinkling its blood to evoke the spirits.

Christianity was (and still is) nothing but the

MOST MISCHIEVOUS SUPERSTITION and their HIDEOUS and SHAMEFUL EVIL beliefs were HATEFUL of humanity. — Great Historian Tacitus​

 

[The Big Dog]

"completely under the bus" ??

Hardly.

But why Annals 15.44 (and possibly all of Annals) is not mentioned by anyone before the 14th century is relevant.

As is it's alignment with the Chronicle of Sulpicius Severus.

Which Arthur Drews addressed in 1912 in his book the Witnesses to the Historicity of Jesus -


Moreover, Drews said

Not often we see one of the leading Nazi intellectuals quoted here. Perhaps you can share his writings about the Glorification of German Nationalism too?

 

[dejudge]

Not often we see one of the leading Nazi intellectuals quoted here. Perhaps you can share his writings about the Glorification of German Nationalism too?

You have exposed that you have no evidence of an historical Jesus.

All you have is propaganda.

 

[The Big Dog]

Fantastic!!!! Tacitus' Annals mentions Romulus. We are getting somewhere!!

We have confirmed Tacitus believed myth characters and ghost stories were historical accounts.

Christus was born of a Ghost like Romulus.

We have not confirmed that the 11th century copy of Tacitus' Annals refers to an assumed historical Jesus who was crucified because he started a fracas at the Jewish Temple.

Tacitus' Annals has been conclusively proven to have been corrupted.

Oh dear, it seems we have a schism in the ranks. Some like Tacitus for his hatred of Christians, some think that Tacitus is not authoritative, some like what actual honest to goodness Nazis have to say in their glorification of German nationalism

Arthur Drews? Oh dear.... Next we'll be looking at Mein Kampf for a history of the Jews.

 

[Mcreal]

Not often we see one of the leading Nazi intellectuals quoted here. Perhaps you can share his writings about the Glorification of German Nationalism too?

lol. Your bait-and-switch / red-herring is ridiculous.

But I'll play your game -

"My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who, once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders. How terrific was His fight for the world against the Jewish poison ... for this that He had to shed His blood upon the Cross. ..."

Adolf Hitler, in a speech on 12 April 1922 (Norman H. Baynes, ed. 'The Speeches of Adolf Hitler', April 1922-August 1939, Vol. 1 of 2, pp. 19-20, Oxford University Press, 1942)​

"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord." 'Fighting Jews as Defending God' [p.60], in Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf.

"It doesn’t even enter their heads to build up a Jewish state in Palestine for the purpose of living there; all they want is a central organization for their international world swindle, endowed with its own sovereign rights and removed from the intervention of other states: a haven for convicted scoundrels and a university for budding crooks." Adolf Hitler; 'On the Weapons of the Jews' [pp. 293-296], 'Mein Kampf'.