57 lines
3.0 KiB
Plaintext
57 lines
3.0 KiB
Plaintext
|
r
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Basically the proof FOR Jesus's exsistance can be found in the follow
|
|||
|
sources:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Cornelius Tacitus (Annals), Celsus (The True Word), Suetonius (The Lives
|
|||
|
of the Ceasars), Pliny the Younger (Letters), Thallus (Lost Work),
|
|||
|
Flavius Josephus (The Antiquities of the Jews), The Talmund, and the
|
|||
|
Bible itself.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
We'll go over these one at a time:
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Cornelius Tacitus (55-120 A.D.) wrote in his annals the following quote:
|
|||
|
"Christians derived their name and origin from Christ, who, in the reign
|
|||
|
of Tiberius, had suffered death by the sentence of the procurator
|
|||
|
Pontius Pilate" - (Annals 15.44)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Problems: Scholars widely accept this as a Christian interpolation.
|
|||
|
Pilate is refered to as a procurator - He was a Prefect -
|
|||
|
A totally different title. He refers to the man as
|
|||
|
"Christus" which means "Annointed One" or "Messiah" - NOT
|
|||
|
as Jesus which would have been required to name someone
|
|||
|
by their NAME instead of their TITLE. It is unlikely
|
|||
|
that Tacitus would have found reference to a Messiah in
|
|||
|
Roman Records.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Celsus wrote in "The True Word" which was written about 178 A.D. The
|
|||
|
historicity of Jesus is presupposed. Celsus's account agrees closely
|
|||
|
with the stories of Jesus found in Talmudic literature, which probably
|
|||
|
were its major source.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Problems: The time that this was written was at least a hundred
|
|||
|
years too late for it to be a considered source. Since
|
|||
|
the writings agree with Talmunic literature it was most
|
|||
|
likely a copy but it is almost surely a forgery or
|
|||
|
writings based on oral tradition and not fact.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Suetonius (69-122 A.D.) wrote in "The Lives of the Ceasars" around 120
|
|||
|
A.D. He mentions an agitator named "Chrestus" - "Since the Jews
|
|||
|
constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus..." The
|
|||
|
passage has been used to confirm the historicity of Jesus but it is
|
|||
|
unlikely that it refers to Jesus.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
Problems: Many scholars maintain that it is likely that Suetonius
|
|||
|
is not referring to Jesus at all but to some messianic
|
|||
|
Jewish agitator named "Chrestus". We know on independent
|
|||
|
grounds that there were Jewish mesianic groups in Rome at
|
|||
|
this time. Other scholars have suggested that perhaps
|
|||
|
because of the sameness of the two words Suetonius
|
|||
|
wrongly was led to believe that the rioters were
|
|||
|
Christians. But even if he was referring to Christian
|
|||
|
rioters, this hardly provides any evidence for the
|
|||
|
historicity of Jesus.
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(** Continued in Another Message **)
|
|||
|
|
|||
|
(R)eply, (E)mail reply, (F)orum-Op, (T)hread, (P)revious, or (N)ext? ................... |