Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Apologetics 301 Guidelines
If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Did the Jews really kill Jesus?
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostClearly Jesus was not the Messiah, the anointed King, as he did not bring about the Kingdom of God.
Your remark is a both a libel and gross calumny against the Jewish people. For upward of seventeen hundred years the Christian church and its adherents has used those malicious lies to persecute the Jews as Deicides and Christ Killers.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dan Zebiri View PostSkeptical Biblical scholar Bart D. Ehrman wrote: "Tacitus's report confirms what we know from other sources, that Jesus was executed by order of the Roman governor of Judea, Pontius Pilate, sometime during Tiberius's reign."
- Ehrman, Bart D. (2001). Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium. Oxford University Press. p. 59. ISBN 978-0195124743.
Another skeptic but celebrated scholar from the Jesus Seminar, John D.Crossan considers the Tacitus passage important in establishing that Jesus existed and was crucified, and states:
"That he was crucified is as sure as anything historical can ever be, since both Josephus and Tacitus... agree with the Christian accounts on at least that basic fact."
- Crossan, John Dominic (1995). Jesus: A Revolutionary Biography. HarperOne. ISBN 0-06-061662-8 page 145.
John P. Meier states that there is no historical or archaeological evidence to support the argument that a scribe may have introduced the passage into the text.
- From John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus, Doubleday: 1991. vol 1: p. 168-171.
Paul Eddy and Gregory Boyd argue that it is "firmly established" that Tacitus provides a non-Christian confirmation of the crucifixion of Jesus.
Suggestions that the whole of Annals by Tacitus may have been a forgery have also been generally rejected by both conservative and skeptical scholars and their studied conclusion.
What you wish as "their opinions" are merely also your wishful thinking any more than are your anti-Christian assertions that color so much of your opinions and speculative attempts to "de-construct Christianity" and destroy it. So desperately passionate..and also so misled.
All the rest remains scholarly contention given that the matter is capable of differing interpretations. The salient fact is that we do not know.
There are reasonable grounds for scepticism, given that second century Christian writers do not mention this event when narrating stories of the Neronian persecutions of Christians.
You appear to want everything to be superficial and lacking any qualification. The assessment of ancient literary sources is not as elementary as that, particularly when they contain commentary pertaining to Christianity, because we cannot entirely rule out the possibility of later Christian interpolations.
I am not denying that a flesh and blood man whom we know as Jesus of Nazareth existed. However, Tacitus does not specifically refer to the man, but a titleexitiabilis superstitio auctor nominis eius Christusconditor [founder] is not employed. Foundational and eponymous are not by any means one and the same thing."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostAt least I felt embarrassed at citing Wikipedia but you show no shame turning to Rational Wiki
Their principle argument seems to be the paucity of contemporaneous accounts of Nero's persecution of Christians for the burning of Rome and they use that to base a claim that the passage is a later interpolation.
What this argument overlooks is that we have lost a massive number of works that were very famous and repeatedly copied. For instance we only have 6 out of at least 90 of Aeschylus' plays. Similarly only 7 of Sophocles' 123 plays still exist. They are and were so well-regarded that both of their works are still being performed today.
It is thought that today we only have roughly a third of Aristotle's works. Probably most famously his Poetics (dealing with comedy) which is the missing work at the center of Umberto Eco' excellent novel, The Name of the Rose. Considering how highly regarded Aristotle was by medieval and Renaissance Christians (especially in the West) the fact that so much has been lost can hardly be blamed on Christians seeking to destroy pagan works.
Even many of the works written by Emperors and the like have been lost and you know darn well these were repeatedly copied and shipped all over the Roman Empire. And for the few that are still extant, nearly all of the earliest copies come from several centuries later. For instance, the earliest copy of Julius Caesar's Commentarii de Bello Gallico ("The Gallic Wars") date from something like nearly 800 years after the original was written.
And then there is the 79 AD eruption of Mt. Vesuvius, which annihilated several Roman cities including Pompeii and Herculaneum, and was witnessed by the tens of thousands of eyewitnesses in and around Naples but is only mentioned by one near contemporary account -- that of Pliny the Younger. Keep in mind that Naples had a reputation during Greco-Roman times as being an area with a highly literate population so we should have a slew of eyewitness reports in our hands not just one. And, IIRC, Pliny's account, written some 30 years later, was spurred on in reaction to Tacitus' Histories.
The point being, is that this argument is a non-starter.
The fact is that only a minuscule amount of writings, in way of any sort of contemporary sources from forties through the sixties of the first century A.D., still survives. As the historian and Biblical academic Edward Musgrave Blaiklock, chair of classics at the University of Auckland for over 20 years, put it in his Jesus Christ: Man or Myth?:
"Bookends set a foot apart on this desk where I write would enclose the works from those significant years."
2.Last edited by rogue06; 06-27-2020, 06:09 PM.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostRead what I wrote and do not try and pretend I "show no shame" That is duplicity on your part. As you seemed to prefer Wiki I gave you another article from the same source.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostPlease stop pretending that I didn't reply to what you wrote. Stop using these sort of excuses to ignore criticism.
Perhaps you should have chosen a more learned source!"It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by DesertBerean View PostIs there a captioned version of this?
At Youtube.com auto generated cc can be turned on.
At the top on the far right, three vertical dots, select playback settings.
Captions off to English auto captions.Last edited by 37818; 06-27-2020, 06:33 PM.. . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV
. . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostThe situation of Roman authorities allowing or ignoring executions appears to be rather fluid. I believe that it was the well known expert of Hellenistic Judaism, Erwin Ramsdell Goodenough, who discovered that extralegal executions conducted by Jewish leaders weren't all that uncommon during that time. For instance, during the time[1] of the Hellenistic Jewish philosopher Philo of Alexander that in that city Roman authorities regularly turned a blind eye to it just as long as it was restricted to Jews who were not Roman citizens and was confined to religious issues."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostI chose Rational Wiki to complement your own reference to Wiki.
Perhaps you should have chosen a more learned source!
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
So what?
If scholars like Boyd and Eddy happen to be clergy, they MUST be wrong due to their theological standpoint according to you? That exposes your bias and unfounded preconceived notions that subjectively drives you.
You appear wishing that eveything connected to the canonical Christian message to be tarred with conspiracies, interpretations and falsehoods. When there are also scholarly evidence pointing against your anti-Christian bias.
Christians here have already shown such evidence with proper citations but you just discount, minimize and ignore them. That's not very clever of you. Just claiming that "we do not know" as "facts" doesn't cut it.
To Crossan and Ehrman, Jesus is the Christ according to the Tacitus record. That your personal view wants to doubt that is equally doubtful and just as contentious. The fact that skeptics like those two can accept that as fact, casts doubts on your opinion.
Originally posted by Hypatia_Alexandria View PostN.B. Boyd and Eddy are both members of the clergy [i.e.pastors] and therefore they approach these matters from their own theological standpoint.
All the rest remains scholarly contention given that the matter is capable of differing interpretations. The salient fact is that we do not know.
There are reasonable grounds for scepticism, given that second century Christian writers do not mention this event when narrating stories of the Neronian persecutions of Christians.
You appear to want everything to be superficial and lacking any qualification. The assessment of ancient literary sources is not as elementary as that, particularly when they contain commentary pertaining to Christianity, because we cannot entirely rule out the possibility of later Christian interpolations.
I am not denying that a flesh and blood man whom we know as Jesus of Nazareth existed. However, Tacitus does not specifically refer to the man, but a title.
He actually makes no reference to Jesus but to Christus which is the Latin form of the Greek translation of the Jewish politico-religious title Messiah. Furthermore, Christianity is described as exitiabilis superstitio [deadly superstition] not as religio [religion]. The inherent difference between these two Latin terms had important contemporary, legal, and social significance.
The Latin text does not mention any founder of Christianity but merely makes reference to the originator [author] of the [Christian] name. The Latin text is this auctor nominis eius Christus. The more precise Latin word conditor [founder] is not employed. Foundational and eponymous are not by any means one and the same thing.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dan Zebiri View PostSo what?
If scholars like Boyd and Eddy happen to be clergy, they MUST be wrong due to their theological standpoint according to you? That exposes your bias and unfounded preconceived notions that subjectively drives you.
You appear wishing that eveything connected to the canonical Christian message to be tarred with conspiracies, interpretations and falsehoods. When there are also scholarly evidence pointing against your anti-Christian bias.
Christians here have already shown such evidence with proper citations but you just discount, minimize and ignore them. That's not very clever of you. Just claiming that "we do not know" as "facts" doesn't cut it.
To Crossan and Ehrman, Jesus is the Christ according to the Tacitus record. That your personal view wants to doubt that is equally doubtful and just as contentious. The fact that skeptics like those two can accept that as fact, casts doubts on your opinion.
You appear wishing that eveything connected to the canonical Christian message to be tarred with conspiracies, INTERPOLATIONS and falsehoods. When there are also scholarly evidence pointing against your anti-Christian bias.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Dan Zebiri View PostSo what?
If scholars like Boyd and Eddy happen to be clergy, they MUST be wrong due to their theological standpoint according to you?
That exposes your bias and unfounded preconceived notions that subjectively drives you.
Originally posted by Dan Zebiri View PostSo what?
You appear wishing that eveything connected to the canonical Christian message to be tarred with conspiracies, interpretations and falsehoods. When there are also scholarly evidence pointing against your anti-Christian bias.
I have not stated categorically that the section of Tacitus is an interpolation, I have simply pointed out that we do not know and we cannot entirely rule out the possibility that it is. That this event is not mentioned by second century Christians when narrating various Neronian persecutions, is an interesting omission.
Originally posted by Dan Zebiri View PostTo Crossan and Ehrman, Jesus is the Christ according to the Tacitus record.Originally posted by Dan Zebiri View PostThat your personal view wants to doubt that is equally doubtful and just as contentious. The fact that skeptics like those two can accept that as fact, casts doubts on your opinion.Last edited by Hypatia_Alexandria; 06-27-2020, 07:19 PM."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostThis is frankly pathetic. You continue to fixate on my first sentence, incessantly whining about it in response to a post that correctly points out that you used it as a blatantly obvious dodge to avoid addressing the body of my post -- and you continue to do so."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostOf course, there were stonings to execute Jews under Jewish law, which were ignored by Roman authorities. I do not believe this is relevant to the fact that Jesus was executed by crucifixion under Roman Law for claiming to be the King of the Jews as others were at that time, which would subvert the authority of Rome."It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
-
Originally posted by Christian3 View PostWhat is the Kingdom of God and where did you hear of it?"It ain't necessarily so
The things that you're liable
To read in the Bible
It ain't necessarily so."
Sportin' Life
Porgy & Bess, DuBose Heyward, George & Ira Gershwin
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Sparko, 06-25-2024, 03:03 PM
|
26 responses
124 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Today, 03:24 AM | ||
Started by Cow Poke, 06-20-2024, 10:04 AM
|
27 responses
141 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Cow Poke
Yesterday, 01:35 PM
|
||
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 06-18-2024, 08:18 AM
|
82 responses
471 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Today, 03:48 AM | ||
Started by whag, 06-15-2024, 09:43 AM
|
149 responses
610 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Today, 07:45 AM | ||
Started by whag, 04-09-2024, 01:04 PM
|
468 responses
2,138 views
0 likes
|
Last Post 06-05-2024, 04:09 AM |
Comment