• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Evidence for why we know the New Testament writers told the truth.

Status
Not open for further replies.
DOC said:
amb said:
Can you please show us some evidence for this historical man Yeshua outside of the N/T ?
Click to expand...


Roman Senator/Historian Tacitus

Jewish historian Josephus mentions Christ twice -- one is contested as a "partial" interpolation by most scholars, the other is deemed legitimate by most scholars.

Roman Seutonius

Thallus

Pliny the Younger

Trajan

Hadrian

Toledoth Jesu

Lucian

Phlegon

Mara Bar-Seraption
Click to expand...


Hypothetical Lurker said:
Can you please show us some evidence for this historical man Yeshua being more-or-less a fabrication?
Click to expand...


joobz
paximperium
Akhenaten
Hokulele
six7s
Lothian
Simon39759
zooterkin
kmortis
amb
pakeha
Elizabeth I
Paulhoff
Ichneumonwasp
Belz...
Mojo
BobTheDonkey
RobRoy
RoboTimbo
dafydd
X
Lucian
wollery
Waterman
carlitos
tsig
Cleon
arthwollipot
Toke
Moss
Cactus Wren
AdinDraco
John Jones
L The Detective
realpaladin
babbits
Mashuna
Achán hiNidráne
Helen
I Ratant
Lord Emsworth
laca
Safe-Keeper
TSR
Niggle
Fitter
Kapyong
Filippo Lippi
Wolrab
articulett
Marcus
AWPrime
eccles
Marduk
Think_Tank
Agatha
temporalillusion
Foster Zygote
Nogbad
pizzadeliveryninja
Sefarst
FireGarden
Mister Agenda
Ducky
sphenisc
MRC_Hans
marksman
Fireshadow
calebprime
truethat
Worm
Ladewig
Wally
Darat
boloboffin
DC
Cavemonster
wmadoss
Chris Hegarty
SezMe
tyr_13
Twiler
politas
GreNME
Dave Rogers
MIKILLINI
Gandalfs Beard
wolfgirl
JimBrown257
jond
catbasket
KarlG
Tricky
Greediguts
soikins
Amazer
KingMerv00
charles brough
FSM
Mirrorglass
Bikewer
NavyPack
JoeTheJuggler
D'rok
Her Dark Star
fuelair
Eyeron
sackett
Rincewind
Lukraak_Sisser
Alice Shortcake
rikzilla
slingblade
VotGs
Undesired Walrus
catsmate1
Thunder
Georg
leonAzul
Z
cyborg
Brainache
kedo1981
TraneWreck
GeeMack
Pure_Argent
Rolfe
jeremyp
supercorgi
longfellow
PrincessIneffabelle
Fiona
Kthulhut Fhtagn
Dubious Dick
23_Tauri
maddog
Wowbagger
ThatSoundAgain
likelystory
Aepervius
H3LL
gentleexit
Astreja
Garrette
Beerina
SDC
Lrrr
Sideroxylon
Resume
lionking
popscythe
gtc
Tanstaafl
UNLoVedRebel
WaterBreather
Jeff Corey
kittynh
Piscivore
gambling_cruiser
LarianLeQuella
George152
chillzero
Robin
Mister Earl
dropzone
Oliver
CriticalSock
shadron
godless dave
Ron_Tomkins
horza66
Bill Thompson
bokonon
Sholto
Unalienable
CriticalThanking
quixotecoyote
Nimrod, the Red Herring

etcetera, etcetera . . .


You lose, DOC.

Ops normal.
 
DOC said:
What are you talking about? Are you saying respected archaeologist Sir William M. Ramsay just made up some character named Luke and then said he was one of the world's greatest historians (regarding facts that can be proved by history and archaeology).
Click to expand...
Don't be silly. Luke was made up well before Sir William M. Ramsay came along.

Out of interest when you talk about Ramsay being respected can I ask who by? The only sites that seem to mention him belong to apologetics.

He is not listed in Wiki's list of 500 archaeologists. About.com lists over 30 archaeologists beginning with R but not a mention of Sir Willy.

Is it that he no longer respected or is he is just not very famous among archaeologists?
 
Last edited:
Helen said:
Akhenaten said:
"Je suis que je suis, mais je ne suis pas que je suis." said the man following the donkey.
Click to expand...


You are a dead donkey?
Click to expand...


Ahh . . . the difficulties the poor translators face!

In French, 'je suis' can mean either 'I am' (if derived from the verb 'to be' - être), or 'I follow' (if derived from the verb 'to follow' - suivre).

In the context of a man following a donkey, the above-quoted phrase would therefore best be translated as 'I am what I am, but I'm not what I follow.'

Good stuff, context, n'est-ce pas?

Perhaps DOC, who is a more cunning linguist than I am, will be able to explain my point more gooderer.
 
Akhenaten said:
Ahh . . . the difficulties the poor translators face!

In French, 'je suis' can mean either 'I am' (if derived from the verb 'to be' - être), or 'I follow' (if derived from the verb 'to follow' - suivre).

In the context of a man following a donkey, the above-quoted phrase would therefore best be translated as 'I am what I am, but I'm not what I follow.'

Good stuff, context, n'est-ce pas?

Perhaps DOC, who is a more cunning linguist than I am, will be able to explain my point more gooderer.
Click to expand...

I know, dearest god, I was just pulling that tail of yours... That phrase is usually about a man following a coffin, when you start out learning French here. A cultural thing, so yes, context is all!
 
Akhenaten said:
<snipped exceeding long list of well respected posters, respectfully>

etcetera, etcetera . . .


You lose, DOC.

Ops normal.
Click to expand...

With the added advantage that we are contemporaneous.

DOC, do you have contemporaneous accounts of Jesus outside of the Bible?

Oh, and do you believe it is morally sublime to beat someone you own?
 
Suetonius: Dissension by someone named Chrestus. Not necessarily Yeshua as Chrestus was a common slave name.

Toledot Yeshu: Not old enough to be reliable. While the oral sources might date back to the 2nd century the work was only codified in 4th century or later.

Phlegon: The eclipse was in the wrong year. Despite attempts at Christian reinterpretation.

Pliny: Congratulations, evidence that some 2nd century Christians refused to worship the Roman emperor. And this proves the existence of Christ and that the New Testament writers wrote the truth how?

Tacitus: Not contemporary. The value of his writings depend on where he got his information from. He may only have reported what Christians believed.

Thallus: Not verifiable what exactly he wrote about. There is only a 3rd century reference to him by Julius Africanus.

Hadrian and Trajan: totally irrelevant when it comes to the existence of a historical Jesus. They wrote about the treatment of Christians. That says nothing about Jesus himself. It proves at best that there were sects/cults that venerated him at that time.

Mara bar Sarapion: As dear Helen said it only names a "wise king". At best ambiguous.
 
Helen said:
I know, dearest god, I was just pulling that tail of yours... That phrase is usually about a man following a coffin, when you start out learning French here. A cultural thing, so yes, context is all!
Click to expand...


Cheers, Lady.

My explanation was more for those playing at home than for an award winning wielder of words such as yourself.

The thing about the coffin is an interesting side-note though. I learned French in ancient Egypt en Australie, and the pun was in my case uttered by a bloke walking behind his ass, which is obviously silly when you think about it.

;)
 
amb said:
Each one of those were writing hearsay. Not one was a witness or knew of any witnesses.
A countryman of Jesus who lived at the same time, and wrote extensively about Pilate and the Romans and Jews of that particular time, is completely silent on the matter of Jesus. I speak of Philo of Alexandria.
Click to expand...

One conclusion would be that miracle workers were so abundant at the time that jebus did not really stand out from the crowd.
 
So has DOC named a single contemporary eyewitness to Yeshua ben Yoseph(see DOC-boy I even used his real name) who wrote anything down?

What are your excuses now for now answering this simple question?
 
Yeshua or Jesus are perfectly acceptable names for the perhaps historical figure the teachings of the NT are based on. Out of deference to this figure, who was, at least, exceptional for his time, I think the name 'Jebus' or 'Jeebus' is an appropriate substitute when referring to a bowdlerized and abused version of the original character. For example, my very devout and kind brother-in-law worships Jesus. Fred Phelps worships Jebus. I rarely use 'Jebus' myself, but when I do it should be taken as a commentary on what I think of the faith of the person I'm conversing with or their mischaracterization of the Jesus presented to us in the NT, rather than an insult directed at the person or persons at the root of the story of Jesus. Yeshua may have been a young man of high ideals cut down in his prime by an oppressive government seeking to silence him; maybe not a perfect person but doing the best he could and standing up for what he believed in. I can respect that. I think Christianity would have been much improved if it had been based on following that man.
 
Elizabeth I said:
How about a little love for those of us who know only two languages, neither of them French, s'il vous plaît?
Click to expand...


An it please thee, Majesty, prithee forgive this thoughtless, misbegotten hurt. My words I wrought unthinking of the grievous harm this low, unseemly tongue doth cause thy tender, shell-like ears, and pray allow'st that I might in some small way make unto thee amends.

Perchance shouldst I unleash some dark, unholy force upon yon uncouth froggie horde thou wilt, as is thy gracious and majestic wont, forgive thine humble servant for this unintended slight?
 
Last edited:
Mister Agenda said:
Yeshua or Jesus are perfectly acceptable names for the perhaps historical figure the teachings of the NT are based on. Out of deference to this figure, who was, at least, exceptional for his time, I think the name 'Jebus' or 'Jeebus' is an appropriate substitute when referring to a bowdlerized and abused version of the original character. For example, my very devout and kind brother-in-law worships Jesus. Fred Phelps worships Jebus. I rarely use 'Jebus' myself, but when I do it should be taken as a commentary on what I think of the faith of the person I'm conversing with or their mischaracterization of the Jesus presented to us in the NT, rather than an insult directed at the person or persons at the root of the story of Jesus. Yeshua may have been a young man of high ideals cut down in his prime by an oppressive government seeking to silence him; maybe not a perfect person but doing the best he could and standing up for what he believed in. I can respect that. I think Christianity would have been much improved if it had been based on following that man.
Click to expand...
Agreed. I would not insult most Christians with calling that idiotic hateful madman that forms the foundation of proud ignorance that people like DOC, Gibhor, 154, KK and our other fundies believe in by Jesus.

Their stupid version is Jebus.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom