things that interest you that others dont care about probably thread

[sral]

Is there clear historical evidence that Jesus existed? No. But that's not unusual.

Is not the Pontius Pilate Stone the only evidence that Pilate existed outside the Gospels (and works likely to be derived from them)?

That said, Jesus wasn't considered any where near as important in his time.

The little surviving first-century literature was mostly written by members of the small, literate Roman elite. To them, Jesus (if they heard of him at all) was merely a troublesome rabble-rouser, perhaps a magician, in a very small, backward part of the world. Jesus’ trial was not news in Rome. If there ever were archives there, they have not survived. If records were kept in Jerusalem, they were lost in the wars of 66-70 AD when Jerusalem was destroyed by the Roman army.

An event that needs to be considered when evaluating the accuracy of the gospels is the Jewish Uprising that happened from 66 to 73 AD. That revolt was completely crushed by the Roman Army. The Holy Lands were devastated. Written records about the life and ministry of Jesus were destroyed. Eye witnesses to that life and ministry were killed or dispersed. Anything written before the revolt is bound to be more accurate than anything written afterwards.

The epistles of St. Paul, which make up about half of the New Testament, were written before the uprising. Unfortunately, they tell very little about the life of Jesus.

I cannot read the Kione Greek in which the New Testament was written. Nevertheless, I have read the Bible from cover to cover eight times in seven translations. I have read many books about the Bible. Some were written from a Fundamentalist standpoint. Some were written using the higher criticism.

My impression from reading Acts is that it was written when St. Paul was still alive. There is no obvious indication that he is going to be martyred. It ends with St. Paul experiencing a fairly comfortable house arrest in Rome. The reader has been told several times that he has not violated Roman or Jewish laws. Members of the Jewish community visit him. He convinces some that Jesus is the Messiah. Others remain unconvinced. Nevertheless, the conversations seem to be civil.

According to Eusebius, who lived from AD 263 – 339, St. Paul and St. Peter were martyred in Rome before the Jewish Uprising began. Archaeological excavations beneath St. Peter's Basilica indicate that at one time St. Paul and St. Peter were buried there.

Where I disagree with the consensus is in dating Mark, Luke, and Acts. According to the consensus Mark was written about 70 AD. Luke and Acts were written ten or more years later. I do not see why Luke would have waited so long to write an account of events that would have been fresher in his memory much earlier.

If Acts was written before 66 AD, Luke was written earlier, and Mark was written earlier still. They would have been written when eye witnesses to the ministry of Jesus were available. These would have been consulted.