It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What about Tacitus? Historical 'Christus' reference

page: 9
53
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 05:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
a reply to: Ove38

Oh it's not that hard really. It's getting there and away which is and has always been the art involved. Anyone with balls alone can still pick up a rock and crack open his neighbour's skull. But then you would have to get away with it. That part's become tougher. Besides, with big data every living soul is basically accounted for at any time. Did you know that every brain on the planet constantly broadcasts a unique stream of data that can be collected and be treated like any data, stored, copied, modulated, transmitted, and the fun thing about it, is that this data has no mass in itself, no medium other than your own brain (which is the most advanced structure we know of in the universe) so like language and thoughts and other things belonging to the ether world, we are not bound by time and space, it can be used for magic, but so can language and prayer too.

As for the Bread, tasty you said? Jesus is tasty? Thought he was more the rock solid kind to you lot. Guess eating rocks these days....


Yes the divine language and prayer (words) of Jesus Christ can be used for miracles.

And no, he is still flesh and blood.




posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 09:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ove38

Yes the divine language and prayer (words) of Jesus Christ can be used for miracles.

And no, he is still flesh and blood.


Jesus said to them, "I am the bread of life" […] "I am the living bread that came down from heaven." [ESV] John 6:35+51

So how is the Bread since you know him and find him tasty? Not all bread is for eating. Jesus knew that. Even king David. And the fourth beast of Daniel came prepared to battle, what, a hairy headed skin and bones hippie in trouble with Rome and the local Jews because of his assumed lineage and the fact he was born out of wedlock to a girl who just recently had her first period, getting pregnant while she was in the care of a certain stone old temple servant called Joseph. I mean, calling Jesus a mamzer would be an understatement. A major taboo scandal would probably be a better way of putting it. He probably scared the crap out of most people he met just by being alive and real. I find it odd he lived to be thirty. Guess it helped when old Joseph died and Mary married the father of Jesus' siblings, a certain Joseph who was her own age. No wonder Jesus had father issues and a messiah complex. For what if Old Joseph was Caesarion come back from the dead so to speak? His body was never found, and there is actually quite a bit of quite tangible evidence suggesting this could actually be the case.
edit on 13-10-2014 by Utnapisjtim because: quote tag



posted on Oct, 13 2014 @ 06:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ove38
I would just like to mention, that Jesus Christ is the highest authority in the entire history of the world, what he said is law ! there is no one above him, he and God are one !



Are you saying that Jesus and God cannot become higher authority than they already are? This is blasphemy. God has no limit. You are wrong.

P.S. Whatever you say. lol. As YOU said YOURSELF. "In the entire history". Pretty much this means since right now is not history, God and Jzeus have no authority? cool!
edit on 18America/ChicagoMon, 13 Oct 2014 18:48:43 -0500upm2014-10-13T18:48:43-05:0031482014-10-13T18:48:43-05:00 by Heruactic because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 04:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
a reply to: Cogito, Ergo Sum

Anything else you'd like to say?

About the Tacitus wishful thinking, or religious psychosis in general?


know. There is a word for you people, and our parents told us that you were not real. Nowadays, I'm not so sure. Soo... are you a Tusseladd or a Ranglefant? A Jotun perhaps? Dovregubben?!? So many species, I don't know the names of half of them. Fusentass?

Of more relevance, how did they go with invisible sky wizards and magical jewish zombies...real? Not?



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 05:21 AM
link   
a reply to: Cogito, Ergo Sum

You're lost in a dream man. And religious psychosis? Do you have some goodie bag full of contempt that you pick your arguments from? Just like I predicted this thread would be ruined by people like yourself. Shambles.



posted on Oct, 14 2014 @ 05:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim
a reply to: Cogito, Ergo Sum

You're lost in a dream man.

Perhaps, yet I'm not proclaiming belief in jewish zombie magicians.


And religious psychosis? Do you have some goodie bag full of contempt that you pick your arguments from? Just like I predicted this thread would be ruined by people like yourself. Shambles.

A true prophet then. Imagine for a moment, you ask for opinion, then get at least one you don't like. Yes, that must seem truly shambolic.



posted on Oct, 24 2014 @ 06:49 AM
link   

originally posted by: Cogito, Ergo Sum
I'm not proclaiming belief in jewish zombie magicians.


I'm not even a Christian...


A true prophet then.


Nah, just a regular false one who happens to be right.
edit on 24-10-2014 by Utnapisjtim because: trimmed the quotes



posted on Sep, 3 2015 @ 02:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Agartha
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

This is what we know about Tacitus and his writings:

- The original Tacitus Annal Books 11 to 16 are lost, so we only have copies of that specific reference to Christians. All those copies were written centuries later, in fact, the first one we know of was from the 15th century.


With the advent of the printing press, many books surfaced that could finally be recorded on a more sustainable medium. The stuff they wrote upon in the early days of the Christian era only lasted a few hundred years or if one was lucky, up to a thousand years perhaps. There are plenty books in this world that hasn't been opened or dusted for ages, with the invention of paper and type-setting things got a whole lot simpler, and better. I don't see that as questionable, we have plenty references to Tacitus' work as far as I know, but like with every such book or tradition, question everything.


- The word Christians was not used in Rome at that point in their history. They were usually called Nazarenes or disciples (see Acts 1:15). The term 'Christian' was not used until the 2nd centrury after Christ.


Luke-Acts is usually dated to late first century, here the word is used plenty times. In Acts 11:26 the author states that they first started calling the Nazarene Christians in Antioch in the days of Saul Paulus who disappeared from the scene prior to 70 AD.


- Tacitus was not a witness to Christ and he could not have met any disciples alive when he wrote his annals. Even if he really did write that passage, it would have all been hearsay anyway.


Check out the Roman concept of Damnatio Memoriae.


- Tacitus described Judea in his 5th book (which is not lost) and he never mentions Jesus or Christians at all.


Lots of people have written about USA without mentioning Elvis, and of those who do mention him, few ever met him or shared a conversation with him. Then again, you'd find people who'd claim Elvis went up with JFK and John Lennon in the Apollo 18 spaceship and currently live on the Moon together with Adolf Hitler and Jimmy Hoffa.


There were lots of forgeries done in the Middle Ages and early Christianity and this chapter seems to be one of them.


I suspect you talk of the latter end of the Middle Ages? Gutenberg, German bibles and suddenly one could mass produce high quality and lasting books at very low costs, and with the Roman Church finally challenged by the reformists and the protestants, things were getting to where we are today. There was a certain thing called the Renaissance that happened in the wakes of this. I'm not saying there were no fakes, there were plenty (ever read Good Omens by Pratchett and Gaiman?), but I think Tacitus has proven to be pretty genuine in its current shape.


One big mistake: Pilatus was a prefect and not a procurator, big difference and Tacitus was an imperial writer, he would have known that.


That could easily have been the result of a copyist's lack of sleep or vitamins. Happens all the time, of all the thousands of manuscripts and bits and pieces of biblical literature, no two documents are identical, there are always deviations, rephrasing, typos, misspellings, grammatical mistakes etc. etc. It's a cursed side effect of hand copying and transcription.


I personally do not believe this passage of the Annals prove the historical figure of Jesus. But this is just my humble personal opinion, and it doesn't necessarily mean others have to think so to. And no, I am not an Atheist, but an Agnostic.



The argument against is typically that Tacitus used the words Christus and Christians and that it's not specific enough.



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 02:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Utnapisjtim

Lots of people have written about USA without mentioning Elvis, and of those who do mention him, few ever met him or shared a conversation with him. Then again, you'd find people who'd claim Elvis went up with JFK and John Lennon in the Apollo 18 spaceship and currently live on the Moon together with Adolf Hitler and Jimmy Hoffa.


I see the above a lot: why believe the existence of other historical figures and not Jesus? Very simple: lack of evidence. For example... Elvis: left pictures, movies and songs to show he was real. Alexander the great: left libraries and cities with his name, a letter engraved in stone to Julius Caesar, etc. Same with many others. What did Jesus leave behind as evidence of having existed? Nothing. He left no artifacts, no writings.. nothing done whilst he was alive.

Also, of other historical figures we have physical descriptions of what they looked like (on coins, busts, etc). Of Jesus we have nothing. If we are to believe the gospels really were a written testimony of his life, then why was he never described? Why don't we have a physical description of Jesus?

We have contemporary evidence of many historical figures. We don't have one piece of contemporary evidence to prove Jesus was a real person.




posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 02:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Agartha

Evidence, right. Like I said look into Damnatio Memoriae and keep in mind that things like reading and writing skills of people were pretty bad, there were no cameras around, and when you keep in mind that this group of Christians were supposed to have been persecuted for being a threat to everything both Hebrew and Roman. They swept the earth of them and nearly managed to destroy every Christian manuscript around for a good century. Christians in the Roman Empire in the first century was like Jews in Berlin in the 30's. I see it as highly unlikely that Jesus never existed. That said, the style of the bible is very similar as to how North Koreans describe their beloved Kims. What should I say, that the stories have been pimped up a bit. There was hardly any magic, miracles or wonders going on at all.



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 02:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Agartha

There seems to be enough for this guy!

Listen closely.




posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 03:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Utnapisjtim

To be honest, if we are to believe the Tacitus passage about Nero was really his own writing, it could well be a work of fiction to discredit Nero and make him look like a coward, as there was a damnatio memoriae against Nero during Tacitus time.

There is no contemporary evidence about Jesus and no lack of writing or other reasons can excuse the complete absence of real contemporary evidence and no contemporary witnesses.




a reply to: randyvs

I just spent 2 minutes of my life listening to a guy talking about all the evidence there is that proves Jesus really existed, and yet he doesn't provide one single piece of proof. Not one. Would you please tell us the evidence he talks about?



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 05:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Agartha

Do you know who Bart Erhman is?
Bart is one of the leading scholars in his field. He edited over 20 books
and three college text books. He's a Professor of religious studies and
a former Christian turned agnostic. Authored a few bestsellers on the
subject. And you can bet, that if what you think about Jesus was correct?
He would know about it first and would most likely be your source. He's
not in anyway biased like that zietgiest crap mysticism you seem to gravitate
towards. You're a victim of people who take advantage of the distance time
has put between us and Christ. Wishful thinking for some with reason.
But that's really just them bullsh#ting themselves in the first place.
No one has any reason to fear Christ.

I certainly didn't mean to waste any of precious time that you were already
wasting anyway. Being on this site isn't exactly productive unless you learn
something right?
edit on Rpm90415v09201500000021 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: randyvs

He still has not one iota of contemporary evidence that Jesus Christ was a real person.



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 05:11 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

So what he's just a liar right?

Why would a man of his distinguished accord reconcile all reputation
with a lie Windword? Some how I tend to take his word over someone
with a grudge.
edit on Rpm90415v15201500000045 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 05:25 PM
link   
a reply to: randyvs




So what he's just a liar right?


Well, if he's insisting that Jesus Christ was a real person, but offers no contemporary evidence, then yes, he's lying. Unless, he was there.......

Otherwise, he's welcome to his opinion, just like numerous other scholars that disagree with his assessment are welcome to theirs.



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 05:28 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

Did you even watch the vid? It isn't that long at all!
He'sright it really makes you look foolish to go
around proclaiming such a thing. And then to say he's
the one lying? That's just pure bias and you know it.
edit on Rpm90415v31201500000021 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 05:32 PM
link   
a reply to: randyvs

I'm very familiar with Bart and his work.

He has zero evidence for an historic Jesus Christ outside of the Bible, a book in which he has invested his entire career. He's protecting his meal ticket.



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 05:39 PM
link   
a reply to: windword




He's protecting his meal ticket.



What a hokey defense that is, you are gone Windword.
My long time respect for you has crumbled to dust with
just those few words. Horrible!



posted on Sep, 4 2015 @ 05:44 PM
link   
a reply to: randyvs

Really....

Bart Ehrman handily tears apart the credibility of the New Testament, as his chosen career, leaving Christians reeling from disillusion. But, he vehemently argues that, even though the Gospels can't be trusted at all, Jesus Christ is real!

It's like when my parents told me Santa Clause, the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny were all lies, but Jesus is real......Trust us!






top topics



 
53
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join