|
|
#1801
09-26-2014, 11:15 AM
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#1802
09-26-2014, 01:08 PM
|
||||
|
Quote:
CORNELIUS TACITUS (55 - 120 A.D.) Tacitus was a 1st and 2nd century Roman historian who lived through the reigns of over half a dozen Roman emperors. Considered one of the greatest historians of ancient Rome, Tacitus verifies the Biblical account of Jesus' execution at the hands of Pontius Pilate who governed Judea from 26-36 A.D. during the reign of Tiberius. "Christus, the founder of the [Christian] name, was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius. But the pernicious superstition, repressed for a time, broke out again, not only through Judea, where the mischief originated, by through the city of Rome also." Annals XV, 44 What this passage reveals and how it confirms the Biblical account: Jesus did exist Jesus was the founder of Christianity Jesus was put to death by Pilate Christianity originated in Judea (With Jesus) Christianity later spread to Rome (Through the Apostles and Evangelists) Skeptic Interjection: Could Tacitus have taken his information from Christian sources? Answer: Because of his position as a professional historian and not as a commentator, it is more likely Tacitus referenced government records over Christian testimony. It is also possible Tacitus received some of his information from his friend and fellow secular historian, Pliny the Younger. Yet, even if Tacitus referenced some of Pliny's sources, it would be out of his character to have done so without critical investigation. An example of Tacitus criticising testimony given to him even from his dear friend Pliny is found here: Annals XV, 55. Tacitus distinguishes between confirmed and hearsay accounts almost 70 times in his History. If he felt this account of Jesus was only a rumor or folklore, he would have issued his usual disclaimer that this account was unverified. Skeptic Interjection: Could this passage have been a Christian interpolation? Answer: Judging by the critical undertones of the passage, this is highly unlikely. Tacitus refers to Christianity as a superstition and insuppressible mischief. Furthermore, there is not a surviving copy of Tacitus' Annals that does not contain this passage. There is no verifiable evidence of tampering of any kind in this passage. Skeptic Interjection: Why is this passage not quoted by the early church fathers? Answer: Due to the condescending nature of Tacitus' testimony, early Christian authors most likely would not have quoted such a source (assuming Tacitus' writings were even available to them). However, our actual answer comes from the content of the passage itself. Nothing in Tacitus' statement mentions anything that was not already common knowledge among Christians. It simply provides evidence of Jesus' existence (a topic not debated at this point in history) and not his divinity. Skeptic Interjection: Does the incorrect use of title procurator instead of prefect negate Tacitus' reliability? Answer: No. Evidence is provided in both secular and Christian works which refer to Pilate as a procurator: "But now Pilate, the procurator of Judea... Antiquities XVIII, 3:1 "Now Pilate, who was sent as procurator into Judea by Tiberius..." The Jewish Wars, Book II 9:2 "Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea, in the times of Tiberius Caesar..." First Apology XII It has been suggested by both Christian and secular scholars that Tacitus was either using an anachronism for the sake of clarity or, since Judea was a relatively new and insignificant Roman province, Pilate might have held both positions. As for some of the other claims they are speculative. "Tacitus should have blamed the Jews and not the Christians" Speculation. Seneca doesn't mention Christ or Christians: Seneca was a historian that focused on the arts, not on political history. If we read an amazon review of the best literature of the 20th century and it never mentioned Bill Clinton would we assume he did not exist? To use Esubius as a reference is dubious at best. He unlike Tacitus before him is not noted for his diligent research into historical facts. To say that esubius' lack of mention of the tacetian account is proof of its non-existence at his time is a speculative assumption. | |||
|
|
||||
|
#1803
09-26-2014, 01:21 PM
|
|||
|
You do also realize that your source material is coming from Acharya s.
I hope you don't find her as a competent authority on the historical nature of Jesus. | ||
|
|
|||
|
#1804
09-26-2014, 01:29 PM
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#1806
09-26-2014, 01:41 PM
|
|||
|
Every religious denomination and most religions are just the original belief system adapted to any given culture.
Original Christianity (Paul the Apostle & pals), fragmented to serve many different cultures: Eastern Orthodox for the eastern slavshits Catholicism for the Mediterranean wops and some northern micks. Protestantism for hardworking nordic people Coptic sect for Africans Much later, we saw Evangelicalism for people who are now so far removed from Jesus' original teachings that they ignore the vast majority of that wacky ancient scripture and catholic-esque ritualism that just doesn't apply to contemporary society anymore. So I really don't know how you can take your own religious beliefs seriously when you know damn well that whatever pure form of Jesus's teachings once existed, have been twisted into a pretzel again and again to accommodate various belief systems. | ||
|
|
|||
|
#1807
09-26-2014, 01:49 PM
|
||||
|
Quote:
They hate the poor, the meek, the gay, the immigrants, the next state over, the coastal cities, the Canadians, medicine, the Europeans, the desperate, the president, the future president, the future, the sick, the dying, the female, the list goes on and on. Oh but they donate to churches so that makes them good in Jesus's eyes right?! Even though those donations go back into the church campaigns against all the poor, the meek, the gay, the immigrants... | |||
|
|
||||
|
#1808
09-26-2014, 02:06 PM
|
||||
|
Quote:
Jesus did exist Jesus was the founder of Christianity Jesus was put to death by Pilate Christianity originated in Judea (With Jesus) Christianity later spread to Rome (Through the Apostles and Evangelists)" No amount of restating this makes it true. Jesus did exist - No records or contemporary historians during Jesus's life wrote about him. Jesus was the founder of Christianity - only according to biblical text which we know a great deal of is historically incorrect. Contemporary Christians living during Tacitus's time would be repeating this historically incorrect information. Jesus was put to death by Pilate - not according to Roman records or contemporary historians. Christianity originated in Judea (With Jesus) - not according to Roman records or historians. Christianity later spread to Rome (Through the Apostles and Evangelists) - which is part of the controversy. Need I remind you of this? "However, the date that a "vast multitude" of Christians was discovered and executed would be around 64 CE, and it is evident that there was no "vast multitude" of Christians at Rome by this time, as there were not even a multitude of them in Judea. Oddly, this brief mention of Christians is all there is in the voluminous works of Tacitus regarding this extraordinary movement, which allegedly possessed such power as to be able to burn Rome. Also, the Neronian persecution of Christians is unrecorded by any other historian of the day and supposedly took place at the very time when Paul was purportedly freely preaching at Rome (Acts 28:30-31), facts that cast strong doubt on whether or not it actually happened" "Skeptic Interjection: Could Tacitus have taken his information from Christian sources?" Yes, his passage does not reflect the records or historical writings of that time. Tacitus was not infallible. He made mistakes and with this passage there is no evidence on record to verify it. Some parts of it like the burning or Rome and a Christian persecution are easily falsifiable. "Skeptic Interjection: Could this passage have been a Christian interpolation?" Yes, his passage does not reflect the records or historical writings of that time. Tacitus was not infallible. He made mistakes and with this passage there is no evidence on record to verify it. Some parts of it like the burning or Rome and a Christian persecution are easily falsifiable. "Skeptic Interjection: Why is this passage not quoted by the early church fathers?" The answer you give here is pure conjecture and that is not evidence. Show me the records of Jesus being executed or a record showing Christians burning Rome. "Skeptic Interjection: Does the incorrect use of title procurator instead of prefect negate Tacitus' reliability?" It certainly casts doubt or else we wouldnt be having this conversation and historians wouldnt debate it either. It is only one of the questionable items about this passage. | |||
|
|
||||
|
#1809
09-26-2014, 02:09 PM
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
|
||||
|
#1810
09-26-2014, 02:21 PM
|
||||
|
Quote:
It's called The Shroud of Turin The image on the cloth (which dates consistently to the time of Jesus death 33 AD) is a 3 dimensional image on a piece of cloth of a man brutally beaten, tortured and crucified. No known technology exists today that could put that image on a cloth like that and certainly nothing existed back then that could have done it. The image on the cloth contains distance mapping. The image can be read like a 3d map. Photographs and paintings don't work that way. The image actually has characteristics of an X-ray. Bone structure can be seen, especially on the hands and facial area All the wounds on the cloth are 100% consistent with biblical accounts. The weapons that were used for torture are 100% accurate to what the Romans would have used for torture during that time. The wounds on the head are consistent with a rudimentary crown of thorns. The wounds on the wrists are 100% consistent with what the Romans would have done if they nailed someone to a cross. They wouldn't have put the nails through the palms. They would have put them through the wrist area between the 2 bones there for stability. 100% consistent. Recent studies confirm the image could only have put there by a severe discharge of Light and Energy. The carbon dating from 1988 used a tampered sample on the end of the cloth that had been repaired after the shroud was damaged in a fire. Recent dating techniques which studied the decay rate of the microfibers age the shroud consistently with the time of Jesus' death No traces of paint or any such nonsense is on that cloth Real blood with bilirubin has been confirmed on the cloth. All consistent with severe torture before death. The body goes into shock during severe stress and produces this chemical in the blood The type of blood on the cloth is AB. Scientists have confirmed the blood was on the cloth before the image The image is actually "on top" of the cloth and could conceivably be scraped away by a razor. It literally rests upon the top most fibers of the material. It only penetrates the tope two microfibers. A human artist (hundreds of years before Da Vinci) could not have faked that. No human artist could fake that today The type of material was very expensive in that era and is consistent with biblical accounts Pollen found on the cloth is consistent with what would have been found in jerusalem during that era. Physical evidence on the cloth itself to confirm where the event took place Road dust found on the area around the hands and feet are almost exclusively from that area in Jerusalem during that time There are over 120 scourge marks on the body. 100% consistent with biblical accounts. All evidence contained within the shroud is 100% consistent with biblical accounts 3D negative image on a piece of cloth. It almost looks like a human being trapped under ice. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] | |||
|
|
||||
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
