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.

 

Has Archaeological Evidence for Jesus Been Discovered?

page: 3
4
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2016 @ 03:07 PM
link   
a reply to: windword


I'm always entertained by apologist's mental gymnastics. Jesus was just a small town, illiterate nobody when it suits you, and a gifted scholar of the Torah who attracted multitudes of followers, according to the Bible.

You are quite adept in twisting words and meanings. In the annals of Roman history Jesus was insignificant and regarded as a little nobody. Naturally, according to the Greek bible he was the central theme. I hope that clears your confusion.

Now explain why Pilate, being the representative of Rome for ten years, was not found worthy to be written in Roman history. Why would it take a Hebrew priest named Josephus to mention a Roman Prefect when Roman records did not even mention their own? As was explained, there was no approval for the death of Jesus by the Roman Courts and because of this infraction of Roman law, along with other infractions, Pilate was recalled, found guilty and deposed. Being there was no death approval there would naturally be no record of Jesus in the Roman records.

But that does not answer why Pilate was not mentioned in the records of Roman antiquity. Perhaps you can enlighten me with my failure to understand? Please leave wiki out of the mix. Wiki is not always reliable as a source and we are not discussing Egyptians either.




posted on May, 16 2016 @ 05:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Seede




In the annals of Roman history Jesus was insignificant and regarded as a little nobody.


Yeah....You keep saying that.



Now explain why Pilate, being the representative of Rome for ten years, was not found worthy to be written in Roman history.


He was written about!


Josephus notes that while Pilate's predecessors had respected Jewish customs by removing all images and effigies on their standards when entering Jerusalem, Pilate allowed his soldiers to bring them into the city at night. When the citizens of Jerusalem discovered these the following day, they appealed to Pilate to remove the ensigns of Caesar from the city. After five days of deliberation, Pilate had his soldiers surround the demonstrators, threatening them with death, which they were willing to accept rather than submit to desecration of Mosaic law. Pilate finally removed the images.



Josephus recounts another incident in which Pilate spent money from the Temple to build an aqueduct. Pilate had soldiers hidden in the crowd of Jews while addressing them and, when Jews again protested his actions he gave the signal for his soldiers to randomly attack, beat and kill – in an attempt to silence Jewish petitions



Philo describes a later, similar incident in which Pilate was chastened by Emperor Tiberius after antagonizing the Jews by setting up gold-coated shields in Herod's Palace in Jerusalem. The shields were ostensibly to honor Tiberius, and this time did not contain engraved images. Philo writes that the shields were set up "not so much to honour Tiberius as to annoy the multitude". The Jews protested the installation of the shields at first to Pilate, and then, when he declined to remove them, by writing to Tiberius. Philo reports that upon reading the letters, Tiberius "wrote to Pilate with a host of reproaches and rebukes for his audacious violation of precedent and bade him at once take down the shields and have them transferred from the capital to Caesarea.


SOURCE



Please leave wiki out of the mix. Wiki is not always reliable as a source and we are not discussing Egyptians either.


Nope. If you don't believe those citations, too bad!



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 05:29 PM
link   
Josephus, Pliny, Tacitus and all the rest are incredible sources, where Jesus is concerned.

I would think a site such as this woulda cleared that up by now, excluding them as reliable.

Where or what is Arimathia? And what proof exists of Abraham?



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 07:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: Seede

Not true at all. Jesus was not a registered cult in the records of the Romans.



You're utterly mistaken after about 150-250 CE. Records of the "Jesus cult" abound from that period. (Still not proof that "Jesus Christ, Son of God" existed, anymore than the cult of Heracles or Isis proved that those deities existed ...)


originally posted by: Seede

If he had organized his doctrine into a certified religion He would have then been entered in the hall of records as such.


Hoo boy. Okay.

Can you describe, utilizing original sources, or research citing original sources, the procedure for having a "certified religion entered into the hall of records" in Rome (or any Roman province, possession, protectorate, etc)?


originally posted by: Seede
Rome allowed any and all religions that were not seditious to Rome to exist and practice their beliefs.


Only as long as they didn't conflict with the official State cult (and subsequent worship of the Caesars). This caused unending conflict in Judea, as a matter of fact.


originally posted by: Seede
Jesus' brother Jacob (James) did register and was allowed the usage of the temple and its literature.


Source?



edit on 16-5-2016 by Gryphon66 because: Noted



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 08:39 PM
link   
a reply to: CheckPointCharlie


Where or what is Arimathia? And what proof exists of Abraham?

Joseph of Arimathea was the uncle of Jesus and guardian of His mother after His death. It was his tomb that Jesus was interred.
Read d.lib.rochester.edu...



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 08:43 PM
link   
a reply to: Seede

Which tomb? There's several that claim to be the one.

Still, that doesn't answer my question. Who or what is Arimathia?

Nobody knows.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66


You're utterly mistaken after about 150-250 CE. Records of the "Jesus cult" abound from that period. (Still not proof that "Jesus Christ, Son of God" existed, anymore than the cult of Heracles or Isis proved that those deities existed ...)

All of this discussion is theology. Proof is not theology. You would have to petition the archives of Italy to prove your imagination. Jesus had no organized religion while alive. His church was organized after His death by His brother James. Jesus had not broken from Judaic tradition and obeyed every whit of the law and prophets. Brother James broke away from rabbinic Judaism and was elected Nasi of the Nazarene sect. He set the Hebrew liturgy as well as forbid sacrifice of any flesh. This became known as the first Christianity.

I don't think I mentioned any set date or dates but the Roman church was organized well after the 70 CE revolt. The synagogue of James flourished for better than a quarter century or about 68 CE.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:16 PM
link   
a reply to: CheckPointCharlie


Still, that doesn't answer my question. Who or what is Arimathia? Nobody knows.

Ramathaim, Arimathea): 1 Macc. 11:34 (Ramathaim- RSV; Ramathem- KJV). The birthplace and sepulcher of Joseph in Judea. Here the body of Jesus was buried (Matt 27:57; Mark 15:43; Luke 23:51; John 19:38). Some scholars identifies it with the present Rentis (Jerome, Remphtis), once most probably Ramathaim-zophim (Rentis) located in the hill country of Ephraim, the home of Samuel, I Sam. 1:10; otherwise known as Ramah. In N.T. times Arimathea was situated NW of Jerusalem in the hill country of Ephraim. See Rathamin.
Source - www.bible-history.com...

Joseph was of the place called Arimathea --



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:30 PM
link   
Jesus is a composite character based off many religions and there isn't a shred of evidence for a historical Jesus of Nazareth.

All of it is called in the Catholic church the pious fraud.

Except the history of Jesus's church is as bad as the worst empires in history.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: defiythelie


a reply to: JDmOKI Why would the Romans make record of it? Because they made records of even the most mundane things as did the Egyptians. Much like we do today.

Not true at all. Jesus was not a registered cult in the records of the Romans. If he had organized his doctrine into a certified religion He would have then been entered in the hall of records as such. Rome allowed any and all religions that were not seditious to Rome to exist and practice their beliefs. Jesus' brother Jacob (James) did register and was allowed the usage of the temple and its literature.

To show that the Romans did not keep all records and were selective as to their history is to look at Pontius Pilate. There is or are no written records of a Pontius Pilate in the Roman hall of records. There has never been one slip of parchment or paper that shows this man was the Prefect of Judaeae from 26 CE to 36 CE. No record that he was recalled because he disobeyed the Roman Courts.

All death penalties were to be submitted to Rome and approved by Rome before any death of slave or citizen would be allowed - Naturally any defense of Rome is not needed for approval but full report is required. So Pontius Pilate did usurp authority in the death of Jesus and Rome had nothing to do with authorizing Jesus' death. Jesus' uncle, Joseph of Arimathea, pressed this issue in Rome and as a result Pilate was recalled and deposed.The only record known to exist other than historians is the Pilate Stone found in 1961 which reads Prefectus Ludaeae.

So by all of this why should a little preacher among hundreds of little preachers have any more recognition in Roman records when in fact Jesus' death was never approved by Rome or even considered in the Roman courts? Rome erased Pilate from their very own records so why would they consider a little Jew who was insignificant to their nation as being so important as to warrant recording? This bible bashing is simply just that.



All of the documents about Jesus and the New Testament are from 500 years after his alleged existence at best.

Plutarch, Philo Judaes, Josephus, the historians of that era and the the Dead Sea Scrolls that are from as late as 68 ad make no mention of any of this.

The oldest Jesus document in the world is the Gospel of Thomas and it doesn't honestly use the name Jesus even if the translators put it in. It is purely a long list of quotes attributed to the Savior.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:53 PM
link   
a reply to: Seede

This is not the answer. Bible cannot prove bible.

Tell me where Arimathia is, or was on a map.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 09:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Joecanada11

Where do you live? I assume the west where Islam is the minority so yes it makes sense a Muslim isn't preaching to you.

Again, I live in the bible belt my entire life and only once been preached at so I find these stories fabrications and exaggerations. Yes it happena but we are grown ups walk away
edit on 16-5-2016 by JDmOKI because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 10:01 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

I do think about it dude and I actually find the message of jesus quite appealing since I prefer the golden rule and the many others that teach it. No I'm not Christian like many atheists assume when I challenge them.

I like to learn from all things even Christian teachings.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 10:04 PM
link   
a reply to: JDmOKI

I don't pay them much mind. Except I've seen street preachers yelling and screaming about Jesus coming back and punishing all of us sinners on many occasions. Mormons and JWs doing door to door visits although I've noticed the Mormons have taken it down a notch lately.

I did however live in a building where half of the tenants were Muslims and none of them bothered me ever. Not once.

As I also stated. There are multiple threads on here by Christians that claim evolution to be a lie. They claim some big scientific conspiracy to discredit the bible. There are threads by Christians stating the bible is scientifically accurate etc. Hence my participation in such threads. If a Muslim posts a thread saying the Quran is scientifically accurate or saying science is trying to discredit god then I'll jump right in.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 10:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Parazurvan


All of the documents about Jesus and the New Testament are from 500 years after his alleged existence at best.


Actually the oldest texts are fragments... and the oldest found until recently was from the gospel of John... which is about the size of a credit card... and it dates to about 200ad... which means whoever copied this fragment from its original had a document that was much older...

Apparently they found an earlier fragment from the gospel of Mark dated to 90ad...

haven't heard much about that discovery in the past little while though...

And Thomas is up for debate within the scholarly community... some date it to as early as 60ish... but most find its a late second or early third century document


edit on 16-5-2016 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 10:34 PM
link   
a reply to: JDmOKI

That's fine. I'm not saying you can't like Jesus or enjoy reading the bible.

But I'm also not going to accept the claim being made by you that atheists only argue about Jesus existing because they want to piss off Christians. That just isn't the case. If that was the only argument atheists had on their side they would have been destroyed by Christian apologists a long time ago. The fact is there are very sound logical reasons to doubt any Religious Avatar or God that has ever been mentioned. At least as far as them being Divine or Having Magic or Supernatural Powers are concerned.

Notice how it's only when we don't have any real evidence for them or the things they allegedly did that they possess supernatural abilities. Otherwise they are just known as prophets and normal men. But over time and without any hard evidence to support what is being said they will start to take on magic abilities and myths and wonders start to come in to play. That's how legends work. All cultures have them. Be it Giants or Super Strong Men or Women of Untold Beauty or Monsters. Many of them have real life people or creatures they are based on, but the stories are enhanced and modified and turn into myth and legend.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 10:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: Gryphon66


You're utterly mistaken after about 150-250 CE. Records of the "Jesus cult" abound from that period. (Still not proof that "Jesus Christ, Son of God" existed, anymore than the cult of Heracles or Isis proved that those deities existed ...)

All of this discussion is theology. Proof is not theology. You would have to petition the archives of Italy to prove your imagination. Jesus had no organized religion while alive. His church was organized after His death by His brother James. Jesus had not broken from Judaic tradition and obeyed every whit of the law and prophets. Brother James broke away from rabbinic Judaism and was elected Nasi of the Nazarene sect. He set the Hebrew liturgy as well as forbid sacrifice of any flesh. This became known as the first Christianity.

I don't think I mentioned any set date or dates but the Roman church was organized well after the 70 CE revolt. The synagogue of James flourished for better than a quarter century or about 68 CE.



Amazing word salad there.

"Petition the archives of Italy" eh? Any certain ones?

Jesus had no organized religion while he was alive? Is he dead?

Further, how do you account for Jesus' claim at Matthew 16:18 that his Church would be built on one of his surviving followers?



And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.


You know, Peter, allegedly the first Bishop of Rome aka Papa aka Pope?



So, no original sources, no scholarly sources, no citations or references to any sort of actual historical framework ... and you want to talk about "my" imagination. Just more presentation of myth as reality.

Enjoy your tossing.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 10:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Gryphon66

Pretty sure the competing faction of Paul's people won the day in any case...

Much easier to swallow for the public...

Ye know, doing good things as opposed to just believing


edit on 16-5-2016 by Akragon because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 10:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Gryphon66

Pretty sure the competing faction of Paul's people won the day in any case...

Much easier to swallow for the public...

Ye know, doing good things as opposed to just believing



Excellent point!




posted on May, 17 2016 @ 01:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Parazurvan


All of the documents about Jesus and the New Testament are from 500 years after his alleged existence at best. Plutarch, Philo Judaes, Josephus, the historians of that era and the the Dead Sea Scrolls that are from as late as 68 ad make no mention of any of this. The oldest Jesus document in the world is the Gospel of Thomas and it doesn't honestly use the name Jesus even if the translators put it in. It is purely a long list of quotes attributed to the Savior.

Jesus' death is commonly accepted as 32 CE but as it is theology it could be less or it could be more. Josephus' Antiiquities of the Jews was written and presented to Rome around 93 or 94 C.E.. That would be more like 62 years and not 500 years.
That is if you accept his work as being contemporary work. If you are one of the 25 percent who deny Jesus in Josephus' work as genuine then that is your prerogative as a "Jesus Mythologist". For the record you are in the minority of opinions of over 75 percent linguistic translators. According to most scholars the TS of his work is authentic contemporary work and Jesus did exist as is described in most translations of the NT.

Besides that literary proof there is no rule that a work must be contemporary. We have had the Aleppo Codex as the oldest Masoretic Torah MSS in existence till all but a few pages were destroyed by the Muslims in 1947 -1948. Then came the DSS which represent about 25 percent of the Tanach. Leaving over 75 percent of Tanach still unknown. This shows me that down through the many centuries the very same has happened including the 70 C.E. and 135 C.E. Jewish revolts. In light of this, your 500 years means nothing as far as authentic literature is concerned. The DSS should show you this in an instant. They must have remained hidden for at least 1,000 years even though dated from 250 B.C.E. to 68 C.E.. Even at being dated does not mean dates penned or even the dates of the autographs which are totally unknown.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join