| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
buddyman 
Senior Member
Joined: 26 June 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 295
|
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote  Reply
 Posted: 23 July 2007 at 1:02pm |
 Andalus wrote:
buddyman wrote:
many questions have risen whether Jesus was crucified.. There are ancient creeds which state he was. The people who state Jesus was crucified did not even believe in him.
Josephus
About this time came Jesus, a wise man, if indeed it is appropriate to call him a man. For he was a performer of paradoxical feats, a teacher of people who accept the unusual with pleasure, and he won over many of the Jews and also many Greeks. He was the Christ.
Josephus does not tell us whether he believed Jesus was the Christ. He just stated he was the Christ.
When Pilate, upon the accusation of the first men amongst us, condemned him to be crucified,
Here is where Jospehus states Jesus was crucified.
those who had formerly loved him did not cease [to follow him], for he appeared to them on the third day, living again, as the divine prophets foretold,
And here he states that Jesus was resurrected!
along with a myriad of other marvellous things concerning him. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day.[36]
|
I realize that credible and scholarly sources are of no importance to you (given the material that you have used so far to explain the credibility of your beliefs is void of any scholarship), but keep in mind that for the rest of the thinking world, no one gives any credibility to the accounts found in Josephus in regards to Jesus. Every major scholar has agreed that these verses have been "interpolated" by early Christians, and so there is no way to distinguish to what is fraud and what he actually wrote. In other words, your fellow Christians tampered with the texts and so the evidence is "corrupted".
This does bring up the question: If the original work of Josephus required the desperation of early Christians to tamper with the work, then it would be reasonable to conclude that the original verses about Jesus were not "impressive" and did not provide the evidence that was hoped for. So why the need to tamper with "real evidence"?
|
There were also ancient Roman creeds by:
Tacitus - he doesnt mention they way of his death, but he specifically mentions Jesus and when you read what he wrote you will see he hated us and blamed us for the things that were going on at that time.
and others such as, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger,
Thallus, Julius Africanus, Lucian and Celus who hated Christians and Jesus.
|
None of these people lived during the time of Jesus, and simply wrote what some Christians thought, which is not necessarily the truth (in other words, nothing was verified and cannot be used to claim historical evidence). Hate would be irrelevant, the writings were simply about what they heard from some people. Hardly evidence to prove the historicity of your claims.
|
There there is Jewish records from the Talmund Sanhedrin
On the eve of the Passover, Yeshu was hanged. Forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried: "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf." But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover.[61]
This is the Jews admitting they "hung" him. Obviously he was hung on the cross.
|
Yeshu was as common as Smith is in anglo America in the first century. There is no clear evidence in this passage that even remotely concludes that it was talking about the "Jesus" you have tunred into a god. There is nothing "obviousl" in this passage. You are "handwaving".
|
LOL! Andalus,
Always excuses with you and someone ALWAYS had to change the real scriptures..LOL! Jesus was killed on the EVE of the Passover- also there is no record of any other Yeshu enticing sorcery or apostasy and being killed for it.
|
 |
buddyman
Senior Member
Joined: 26 June 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 295
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 July 2007 at 1:09pm |
islamispeace wrote:
"Josephus
About this time came Jesus, a wise man, if indeed it is appropriate to call him a man. For he was a performer of paradoxical feats, a teacher of people who accept the unusual with pleasure, and he won over many of the Jews and also many Greeks. He was the Christ.
Josephus does not tell us whether he believed Jesus was the Christ. He just stated he was the Christ.
When Pilate, upon the accusation of the first men amongst us, condemned him to be crucified,
Here is where Jospehus states Jesus was crucified.
those who had formerly loved him did not cease [to follow him], for he appeared to them on the third day, living again, as the divine prophets foretold,
And here he states that Jesus was resurrected!
along with a myriad of other marvellous things concerning him. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day.[36]"
The so-called "Testimonium Flavianum" is nothing more than a simple Christian forgery from the 3rd century AD. When one studies the Testimonium, obvious questions arise. For instance, why would Josephus, a Jew, have said that Jesus performed "paradoxical feats" or that "he appeared to [his followers] on the third day" or that "he was the Christ"? If Josephus said that Jesus "was the Christ," would it not mean that he actually believed it? If he said that he appeared alive on the third day, would it not mean he believed that as well? But why would he? Why would he regard two, that's right two, men as the Messiah? Who was the second man, you ask? It was Vespasian. Josephus wrote in "Wars of the Jews" the following:
"But now, what did elevate them [the Jews] in undertaking this war was an ambiguous oracle that was also found in their sacred writings, how, 'about that time, one from their country should become governor of the habitable earth.' The Jews took this prediction to belong to themselves in particular; and many of the wise men were thereby deceived in their determination. Now, this oracle certainly denoted the government of Vespasian, who was appointed emperor in Judea." (Book 6, Chapter 6, v. 4)
Notice that Josephus refers to "an ambiguous oracle" referring to "one from their country" who would become ruler of the world. This certainly sounds like a reference to the Messiah. Josephus believed that Vespasian fulfilled this prophecy, and thus was the Messiah. Obviously, both Jesus and Vespasian could not have been the Messiah.
Another important fact to take note of is the complete absence of the Testimonium in any of the writings of Christian historians, until Eusebius, a 3rd century historian. Origen, a 2nd century historian, makes no mention of Josephus' testimony regarding Jesus. He does refer to Josephus' rendition of the execution of James, the brother of Jesus, but makes no reference to the "Testimonium Flavianum." Now why would he have done that?
Third, let us say that Josephus' account of Jesus is genuine. Let us also say that he is a reliable source of the events of that time. Therefore, every event which had occurred in that time period, from the reign of Herod the Great to the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem and Vespasian's ascension to power, would be found in Josephus' account. What other major events took place in that time period? The Gospel of Matthew claims that during the reign of Herod the Great, all male children were ordered to be slaughtered, much like the slaughter of all male children in Egypt. This was done because Herod feared the arrival of the Messiah, who could potentially overthrow him. The Gospel states the following:
"16When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. 17Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled: 18"A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more."" (2:16-18)
If this so-called "Massacre of the Innocents" had truly occurred, certainly Josephus would have mentioned it in his historical works, especially since it involved many Jewish children. Unfortunately, no such account exists in any of Josephus' works. Why is this so? Josephus mentioned Pharaoh's orders to massacre all male children among the Jews, so it would have made sense that he also mention Herod's similar crime. Concerning Pharaoh's orders, Josephus writes:
"Which thing was so feared by the king, that, according to this man's opinion, he commanded that they should cast every male child, which was born to the Israelites, into the river, and destroy it;" ("Antiquities of the Jews," Book 2, Chapter 9, v. 2)
Can anyone find a similar account involving Herod and the children of Bethelem and the surrounding areas?
Interesting you should ask. If a man is capable of killing his wife and son, why wuldn't he be capable of killing anyone that posed a threat to him? Josephus did mention that.
Clearly, the Christian use of Josephus to confirm their beliefs is not without controversy and contradiction. Upon careful study of Josephus' works, we find no real confirmation.
The use of Tacitus is also not without controversy. I will comment on this later, inshaAllah.
|
|
|
buddyman
Senior Member
Joined: 26 June 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 295
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 July 2007 at 1:10pm |
islamispeace wrote:
"Josephus
About this time came Jesus, a wise man, if indeed it is appropriate to call him a man. For he was a performer of paradoxical feats, a teacher of people who accept the unusual with pleasure, and he won over many of the Jews and also many Greeks. He was the Christ.
Josephus does not tell us whether he believed Jesus was the Christ. He just stated he was the Christ.
When Pilate, upon the accusation of the first men amongst us, condemned him to be crucified,
Here is where Jospehus states Jesus was crucified.
those who had formerly loved him did not cease [to follow him], for he appeared to them on the third day, living again, as the divine prophets foretold,
And here he states that Jesus was resurrected!
along with a myriad of other marvellous things concerning him. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day.[36]"
The so-called "Testimonium Flavianum" is nothing more than a simple Christian forgery from the 3rd century AD. When one studies the Testimonium, obvious questions arise. For instance, why would Josephus, a Jew, have said that Jesus performed "paradoxical feats" or that "he appeared to [his followers] on the third day" or that "he was the Christ"? If Josephus said that Jesus "was the Christ," would it not mean that he actually believed it? If he said that he appeared alive on the third day, would it not mean he believed that as well? But why would he? Why would he regard two, that's right two, men as the Messiah? Who was the second man, you ask? It was Vespasian. Josephus wrote in "Wars of the Jews" the following:
"But now, what did elevate them [the Jews] in undertaking this war was an ambiguous oracle that was also found in their sacred writings, how, 'about that time, one from their country should become governor of the habitable earth.' The Jews took this prediction to belong to themselves in particular; and many of the wise men were thereby deceived in their determination. Now, this oracle certainly denoted the government of Vespasian, who was appointed emperor in Judea." (Book 6, Chapter 6, v. 4)
Notice that Josephus refers to "an ambiguous oracle" referring to "one from their country" who would become ruler of the world. This certainly sounds like a reference to the Messiah. Josephus believed that Vespasian fulfilled this prophecy, and thus was the Messiah. Obviously, both Jesus and Vespasian could not have been the Messiah.
Another important fact to take note of is the complete absence of the Testimonium in any of the writings of Christian historians, until Eusebius, a 3rd century historian. Origen, a 2nd century historian, makes no mention of Josephus' testimony regarding Jesus. He does refer to Josephus' rendition of the execution of James, the brother of Jesus, but makes no reference to the "Testimonium Flavianum." Now why would he have done that?
Third, let us say that Josephus' account of Jesus is genuine. Let us also say that he is a reliable source of the events of that time. Therefore, every event which had occurred in that time period, from the reign of Herod the Great to the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem and Vespasian's ascension to power, would be found in Josephus' account. What other major events took place in that time period? The Gospel of Matthew claims that during the reign of Herod the Great, all male children were ordered to be slaughtered, much like the slaughter of all male children in Egypt. This was done because Herod feared the arrival of the Messiah, who could potentially overthrow him. The Gospel states the following:
"16When Herod realized that he had been outwitted by the Magi, he was furious, and he gave orders to kill all the boys in Bethlehem and its vicinity who were two years old and under, in accordance with the time he had learned from the Magi. 17Then what was said through the prophet Jeremiah was fulfilled: 18"A voice is heard in Ramah, weeping and great mourning, Rachel weeping for her children and refusing to be comforted, because they are no more."" (2:16-18)
If this so-called "Massacre of the Innocents" had truly occurred, certainly Josephus would have mentioned it in his historical works, especially since it involved many Jewish children. Unfortunately, no such account exists in any of Josephus' works. Why is this so? Josephus mentioned Pharaoh's orders to massacre all male children among the Jews, so it would have made sense that he also mention Herod's similar crime. Concerning Pharaoh's orders, Josephus writes:
"Which thing was so feared by the king, that, according to this man's opinion, he commanded that they should cast every male child, which was born to the Israelites, into the river, and destroy it;" ("Antiquities of the Jews," Book 2, Chapter 9, v. 2)
Can anyone find a similar account involving Herod and the children of Bethelem and the surrounding areas?
Clearly, the Christian use of Josephus to confirm their beliefs is not without controversy and contradiction. Upon careful study of Josephus' works, we find no real confirmation.
The use of Tacitus is also not without controversy. I will comment on this later, inshaAllah.
|
Also you fail to mention other writers such as Ambrosius Theodosius Macrobius. I don't believe it matters that these things were written after the fact. What matters is that they were still written because they happened and were spoken of.
|
|
islamispeace
Senior Member
Joined: 01 November 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 2187
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 July 2007 at 4:11pm |
"Interesting you should
ask. If a man is capable of killing his wife and son, why wuldn't he be
capable of killing anyone that posed a threat to him? Josephus did
mention that." Is this the best you can do? Your question seems oddly out of place. I should be the one asking this question. Yes, buddyman, why would not Herod be capable of killing innocent children when he clearly had shown that he was capable of killing his own loved ones? But, if he was, why are there no accounts of the so-called "Massacre of the Innocents" mentioned in the works of any historian from that time? I challenge you to show me any such account by Josephus or any other historian from the 1st century. I know you will not be able to meet this challenge because the absolute earliest account is from the 4th century, and hilariously I note, from Ambrosius Theodosius Macrobius. Your only piece of evidence is the claim of a 4th century historian? Don't make me laugh. The absolute truth is that the "Massacre of the Innocents" upon Herod's orders is a myth, nothing more.
|
|
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)
|
|
Andalus
Moderator Group
Joined: 12 October 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1187
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 23 July 2007 at 8:54pm |
buddyman wrote:
Andalus wrote:
buddyman wrote:
many questions have risen whether Jesus was crucified.. There are ancient creeds which state he was. The people who state Jesus was crucified did not even believe in him.
Josephus
About this time came Jesus, a wise man, if indeed it is appropriate to call him a man. For he was a performer of paradoxical feats, a teacher of people who accept the unusual with pleasure, and he won over many of the Jews and also many Greeks. He was the Christ.
Josephus does not tell us whether he believed Jesus was the Christ. He just stated he was the Christ.
When Pilate, upon the accusation of the first men amongst us, condemned him to be crucified,
Here is where Jospehus states Jesus was crucified.
those who had formerly loved him did not cease [to follow him], for he appeared to them on the third day, living again, as the divine prophets foretold,
And here he states that Jesus was resurrected!
along with a myriad of other marvellous things concerning him. And the tribe of the Christians, so named after him, has not disappeared to this day.[36]
|
I realize that credible and scholarly sources are of no importance to you (given the material that you have used so far to explain the credibility of your beliefs is void of any scholarship), but keep in mind that for the rest of the thinking world, no one gives any credibility to the accounts found in Josephus in regards to Jesus. Every major scholar has agreed that these verses have been "interpolated" by early Christians, and so there is no way to distinguish to what is fraud and what he actually wrote. In other words, your fellow Christians tampered with the texts and so the evidence is "corrupted".
This does bring up the question: If the original work of Josephus required the desperation of early Christians to tamper with the work, then it would be reasonable to conclude that the original verses about Jesus were not "impressive" and did not provide the evidence that was hoped for. So why the need to tamper with "real evidence"?
|
There were also ancient Roman creeds by:
Tacitus - he doesnt mention they way of his death, but he specifically mentions Jesus and when you read what he wrote you will see he hated us and blamed us for the things that were going on at that time.
and others such as, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger,
Thallus, Julius Africanus, Lucian and Celus who hated Christians and Jesus.
|
None of these people lived during the time of Jesus, and simply wrote what some Christians thought, which is not necessarily the truth (in other words, nothing was verified and cannot be used to claim historical evidence). Hate would be irrelevant, the writings were simply about what they heard from some people. Hardly evidence to prove the historicity of your claims.
|
There there is Jewish records from the Talmund Sanhedrin
On the eve of the Passover, Yeshu was hanged. Forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried: "He is going forth to be stoned because he has practiced sorcery and enticed Israel to apostasy. Any one who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf." But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover.[61]
This is the Jews admitting they "hung" him. Obviously he was hung on the cross.
|
Yeshu was as common as Smith is in anglo America in the first century. There is no clear evidence in this passage that even remotely concludes that it was talking about the "Jesus" you have tunred into a god. There is nothing "obviousl" in this passage. You are "handwaving".
|
LOL! Andalus,
Always excuses with you and someone ALWAYS had to change the real scriptures..LOL!
|
Greetings Buddyman.
1) I have given you rational, solid reasons to object based upon "critical thinking". If one must trash reason and use blind faith to believe, then one must use "excuses" to maintain their belief, which is what you have given since your time on this forum.
2) I never stated anything about the NT nor the topic of textual criticism of the bible. The passages of Josephus that you provided are labeled by the majority of mainstream scholars as "products of interpolation". That is a fact. Perhaps you do not see the absurdity in your request that I must accept these writings as fact, but I will give you an analogy of just how absurd your notion is:
In the court of law, the defendent and his attorney discover that the prosecuter is using evidence that has been tampered with. When they approach the prosecuter about this discovery, the prosectuer shrugs his shoulders and exclaims that the evidence is not a problem, after all, it was a witness of the prosecuter that did the tampering. No problem!
And buddyman, you would not accept this, nor would the court, but in the realm of your faith, this is "ok".
|
Jesus was killed on the EVE of the Passover- also there is no record of any other Yeshu enticing sorcery or apostasy and being killed for it.
|
Circular reasoning.
Furthermore, keep in mind that the talmud was not written down until the late second, early third century. So even if you want to use the fallacy of circular reasoning to maintain your belief in this passage, you still have nothing but a second/third century "witness" (I used the term very loosley for the sake of argument) with no ability to validate the claim.
I am sorry that you cannot recognize clear, rational objections stated without ambiguity, not befuddled by a great deal of theological hyperbole which consumes 98% of the material you copy and paste.
I beg you to contemplate seriously, and understand the contrast between an excuse and a real objection.
regards
|
|
A feeling of discouragement when you slip up is a sure sign that you put your faith in deeds. -Ibn 'Ata'llah
http://www.sunnipath.com
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/
http://www.pt-go.com/
|
|
buddyman
Senior Member
Joined: 26 June 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 295
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 24 July 2007 at 9:11am |
Greetings Buddyman.
1) I have given you rational, solid reasons to object based upon "critical thinking". If one must trash reason and use blind faith to believe, then one must use "excuses" to maintain their belief, which is what you have given since your time on this forum.
2) I never stated anything about the NT nor the topic of textual criticism of the bible. The passages of Josephus that you provided are labeled by the majority of mainstream scholars as "products of interpolation". That is a fact. Perhaps you do not see the absurdity in your request that I must accept these writings as fact, but I will give you an analogy of just how absurd your notion is:
In the court of law, the defendent and his attorney discover that the prosecuter is using evidence that has been tampered with. When they approach the prosecuter about this discovery, the prosectuer shrugs his shoulders and exclaims that the evidence is not a problem, after all, it was a witness of the prosecuter that did the tampering. No problem!
It's kind of interesting how you think our scriptures are tampered with or anything having to prove you wrong is tampered with. Do you think the Quran was tampered with?
|
|
islamispeace
Senior Member
Joined: 01 November 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 2187
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 24 July 2007 at 6:30pm |
" It's kind of interesting how you think our
scriptures are tampered with or anything having to prove you wrong is
tampered with. Do you think the Quran was tampered with?"
You know buddyman, I have noticed that you typically make two types of responses:
1. Those which are, as brother Andalus noted, 90% "copy and paste", in which basically, you do a quick google or wikipedia search and post the article(s) without any real effort, thought or research
OR
2. Those which are your own, but only one or two sentences, and usually completely unrelated to the matter at hand.
Your latest response falls in the second category. Instead of answering brother Andalus' questions, you countered with a question of your which is not even related to the issue. Brother Andalus made it clear that he is not talking about the Bible. The topic is whether the historical accounts you mentioned are authentic or not (I have shown, at least with Josephus, that they are not), and there has been nothing mentioned about the Bible. Why don't you respond to the actual issues raised by brother Andalus? In addition, why can't you seem to do some real research? Post a response which does not fall into the two categories mentioned above, for once at least!
Edited by islamispeace
|
|
Say: "Truly, my prayer and my service of sacrifice, my life and my death, are (all) for Allah, the Cherisher of the Worlds. (Surat al-Anaam: 162)
|
|
Andalus
Moderator Group
Joined: 12 October 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1187
|
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply
Posted: 24 July 2007 at 8:40pm |
buddyman wrote:
Greetings Buddyman.
1) I have given you rational, solid reasons to object based upon "critical thinking". If one must trash reason and use blind faith to believe, then one must use "excuses" to maintain their belief, which is what you have given since your time on this forum.
2) I never stated anything about the NT nor the topic of textual criticism of the bible. The passages of Josephus that you provided are labeled by the majority of mainstream scholars as "products of interpolation". That is a fact. Perhaps you do not see the absurdity in your request that I must accept these writings as fact, but I will give you an analogy of just how absurd your notion is:
In the court of law, the defendent and his attorney discover that the prosecuter is using evidence that has been tampered with. When they approach the prosecuter about this discovery, the prosectuer shrugs his shoulders and exclaims that the evidence is not a problem, after all, it was a witness of the prosecuter that did the tampering. No problem!
It's kind of interesting how you think our scriptures are tampered with or anything having to prove you wrong is tampered with.
|
You are digressing, as there is no discussion on textual criticism of the bible in this thread.
What is even more compelling is that I have shown you why I rejected your evidences, none of which includes "because they prove me wrong". Why is it that even in the face of rational reasoning, you simply appeal to your erroneous evidences as me being "difficult". Buddyman, no serious scholar accepts Josephus concerning Jesus as a word for word witness of the author. The lack of reply conerning my objections is a telling indication that your belief in your faith is based upon blind faith.
|
Do you think the Quran was tampered with?
|
This is an irrelevant question, but for the sake of argument, no.
|
|
A feeling of discouragement when you slip up is a sure sign that you put your faith in deeds. -Ibn 'Ata'llah
http://www.sunnipath.com
http://www.sunniforum.com/forum/
http://www.pt-go.com/
|
|
Tweet
