Quote:
Originally Posted by sraL
Certainly the non-Christians who wrote about him in the years following his putative death did not doubt he had once lived. The Roman historian Tacitus, writing in his Annals around 110 AD, mentions one “Christ, whom the procurator Pontius Pilate had executed in the reign of Tiberius.” The Jewish historian Josephus remarks on the stoning of “James, the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ.” The Talmud, a collection of Jewish writings, also refers to Christ, although it says he was the illegitimate son of a Roman soldier called Panther. Doubts about the historicity of Christ did not surface until the 18th century. In short, whether or not JC was truly the Son of God, he was probably the son of somebody.
The scenario where Jesus is 100% myth is less plausible than the scenario where mythic and legendary ideas are attached to a historical figure. Ergo, there is little reason to assume there is no historical Jesus, and rather a lot of circumstantial evidence to suggest that there was one.
|
josephus was a jew, who literally wrote the history of JUDEA during the 1st century, and made one passing mention of a guy people called christus. christus=messiah. so he makes reference to a man named jesus people called the messiah.
that doesn't mean the man existed. it means people referred to a man they call jesus the messiah. the greeks referred to a man called the son of god, hercules. did he exist? maybe. where is the proof?
jesus was allegedly crucified in 29ish AD. josephus wasn't born until 37 AD. in 64 BC nero was blaming fires on and executing christians, IN ROME. christians were in rome 35 years after the death of the alleged jesus. in a big enough number to be mentioned by the emperor. meanwhile josephus is still jewing it up in judea, getting ready to fight in the jewish rebellions against rome. before losing and defecting to rome, and then writing the history of judea during the time of jesus
you would think such a giant historical figure would get more than a passing mention
tacitus is the same deal, only less credible because he is from the south of france (or belgium or northern italy) and is speaking from even further from the events
the point being that when these men are writing the history of a region they need sources, sources are people. if christians already proliferated the myth of jesus, those sources would speak of him as if he existed because people talked as if he did