Did Jesus Ever Really Exist?

[BooRadley]

I've never even gone to Catholic church. But my bff is "catholic" and semi-atheist, and she swears she's forever Catholic because they put water on her head as a baby.

I don't know. Maybe. I guess, thinking about it, maybe I did still consider myself catholic for a while. Like it was kind of hard to drop it. That was quite a while ago, though. I don't feel the slightest bit Catholic nowadays. Haven't in quite a few years. I suppose I did for a while though. I hadn't thought about that in ages. Guess it's kind of hard to leave the family even after you've figured out that they're all crazy as fuck.

[BooRadley]

In Catholicism, as long as you have been baptised you're a Catholic whether you like it or not, unless you're excommunicated from the church.

Well, so says the Church. Since I think the Church is full of crap, they can say whatever they'd like. I suppose from their viewpoint though, I'm still a Catholic. Kind of got a chuckle out of thinking about this. Hasn't been something I gave thought to in ages. It's been many, many years since I self-identified as a Catholic, so just thinking that I could start saying that is kind of funny. Actually, very funny.

[Cyclone Ranger]

The Josephus source was proven a forgery for hundreds of years now.

Evidence? Some scholars do feel Josephus' text was corrupted, but saying his source was proven a forgery sounds a bit overstated

I can't find anything at all on "Alcibitus."

Excuse me, it was Tacitus who wrote on Jesus, not Alcibitius.

[optimus]

Well, so says the Church. Since I think the Church is full of crap, they can say whatever they'd like. I suppose from their viewpoint though, I'm still a Catholic. Kind of got a chuckle out of thinking about this. Hasn't been something I gave thought to in ages. It's been many, many years since I self-identified as a Catholic, so just thinking that I could start saying that is kind of funny. Actually, very funny.

Yes, that's what I meant -- from their viewpoint. Like my parents still look at me as if I'm a Catholic, even though I left it years ago.

I don't think anything comes close to the brainwashing of Catholicism. It's brutal.

[optimus]

Tacitus only references "Christus," which isn't a name, it's a title that means "The Anointed One."

Further, there were boatloads of contemporary historians during or shortly after Jesus' time on earth, and NONE of them wrote about him.

[Cyclone Ranger]

"Boatloads" is an exaggeration.

The modern concept of history as literal fact did not yet exist. Moreover, amongst contemporary historical writers, not all were placed to have first or second-hand acquaintance with that marginal Jew Christ - and only a few would consider him of any importance.

Additionally, Tacitus was not a Christian, and could easily have confused Jesus' title with a surname or patronymic, as people often do today.

[optimus]

Evidence? Some scholars do feel Josephus' text was corrupted, but saying his source was proven a forgery sounds a bit overstated.

Link

Open in Reader, search "forgery."

[Cyclone Ranger]

I don't see what credentials the filmmakers have as authoritative sources on first century Judaism and related texts.

[optimus]

I don't see what credentials the filmmakers have as authoritative sources on first century Judaism and related texts.

They link and cite works written by historians and scholars on the subject. L2Read.

[kellyb]

I don't think anything comes close to the brainwashing of Catholicism. It's brutal.

As a former kid raised evangelical, I'll totally dispute you and feel you at the same time..

I find all abusive religious brainwashing and abuse bad. As I know you do.

And I don't doubt that Catholics are often guilty.

[optimus]

"Boatloads" is an exaggeration.

Depends on the size of the boat. There were at least 23 known historians at the time who could've written about Jesus.

The modern concept of history as literal fact did not yet exist.

Not exactly sure what you mean by that, of course the concept existed. This was fairly recent in our history, they weren't bumbling morons back then who couldn't grasp the concept of history. Your assertion is simply retarded.

Moreover, amongst contemporary historical writers, not all were placed to have first or second-hand acquaintance with that marginal Jew Christ - and only a few would consider him of any importance.

NO ONE is documented to have any first or second hand acquaintances with Jesus -- because he didn't exist.

Additionally, Tacitus was not a Christian, and could easily have confused Jesus' title with a surname or patronymic, as people often do today.

"Christus" was used in a few other pieces of text, it didn't mean Jesus at the time.

[optimus]

As a former kid raised evangelical, I'll totally dispute you and feel you at the same time..

I find all abusive religious brainwashing and abuse bad. As I know you do.

And I don't doubt that Catholics are often guilty.

Heh. I know. It's just that in my mind Catholicism has it down to a science, they can manipulate and control like no other.

[kellyb]

I was taught at ECS some really crazy notions.
Like "God intended for the US to be a Christian Nation. And "We are meant to convert almost the whole world to Christianity."
I thought it perfectly logical at the time.

My thoughts beyond that are complicated.

[Cyclone Ranger]

Depends on the size of the boat. There were at least 23 known historians at the time who could've written about Jesus.

Evidence?

Not exactly sure what you mean by that, of course the concept existed.

No, it didn't. Historians in that era regularly cited mythology as causes and origins of historical events, as Thuycidides and Herotodus did.

In fact, in Jesus' day, the tradition was to invent sayings and actions, attribute them to your teacher, then sign his name to it.

This was fairly recent in our history

Bullshit, it was two thousand years ago.

they weren't bumbling morons back then who
couldn't grasp the concept of history. Your assertion is simply retarded.

No, the above assertion is ignorant of the history of historiography, which simply did not exist in the First Century.

"Christus" was used in a few other pieces of text, it didn't mean Jesus at the time.

No, it didn't mean Jesus to Christians, which says nothing whatsoever about Tacitus' use of it.

[Cyclone Ranger]

They link and cite works written by historians and scholars on the subject. L2Read.

More like a few out of context quotes from authors that apparently agree with the filmmakers. Not what I would call a definitive historical tour de force.

[optimus]

Humans have been around for hundreds of thousands of years. We are biologically no different now from what we were a little over a million years ago. 2000 years is a drop in the fucking bucket in terms of time on this planet. 2000 years is not a long time scientifically speaking.

[optimus]

More like a few out of context quotes from authors that apparently agree with the filmmakers. Not what I would call a definitive historical tour de force.

Nothing was "out of context." You're grasping for straws.

[jwreck]

Humans have been around for hundreds of thousands of years. We are biologically no different now from what we were a little over a million years ago. 2000 years is a drop in the fucking bucket in terms of time on this planet. 2000 years is not a long time scientifically speaking.

But it was only 7 days to God.

[Cyclone Ranger]

Nothing was "out of context." You're grasping for straws.

Of course they were out of context. They reproduced a couple of paragraphs extracted from entire books.

[optimus]

Evidence?

Aulus Persius
Columella
Dio Chrysostom
Justus of Tiberius
Livy
Lucanus
Lucius Florus
Petronius
Phaedrus
Philo Judaeus
Phlegon
Pliny The Elder
Plutarch
Pomponius Mela
Rufus Curtius
Quintilian
Quintus Curtius
Seneca
Silius Italicus
Statius Caecilius
Theon of Smyrma
Valerius Flaccus
Valerius Maximus

Not one of them ever wrote a thing about Jesus.