| We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| defending Gods Word. | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: May 15 2009, 09:35 PM (195 Views) | |
| the breeze | May 15 2009, 09:35 PM Post #1 |
the breeze
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Friday May 15 2009 • Home >> And Jesus? >> Why You Can Believe the Bible Search: How do we know that the Bible we have today can be trusted? The Bible claims to be God's unique communication to mankind. Billions of men and women have based their lives on its message. Millions have died for it. Can an intelligent person believe in the Bible? Yes. The Bible is not a book of fables. Unlike other spiritual books, it does not demand blind faith. Multiple categories of evidence support the historical accuracy of the Bible as well as its claim to divine authorship. •Ancient history supports the Bible's accuracy as a historical record. •The Gospels provide multiple reliable accounts of Jesus' life. •Archaeology backs up the Biblical account. •Textual scholarship confirms that the books of the Bible have not changed since they were first written. Does ancient history agree with the Bible? If the Bible is God's message to us, we should hope its version of history is accurate. It is. For example, the Bible reports that Jesus of Nazareth performed many miracles, was executed by the Romans, and rose from the dead. Numerous ancient historians corroborate the Bible's account of the life of Jesus and his followers: Cornelius Tacitus (A.D. 55-120), an historian of first-century Rome, is considered one of the most accurate historians of the ancient world.1 An excerpt from Tacitus tells us that the Roman emperor Nero "inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class...called Christians. ...Christus [Christ], from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus...."2 Flavius Josephus, a Jewish historian (A.D. 38-100+), wrote about Jesus in his Jewish Antiquities. From Josephus, "we learn that Jesus was a wise man who did surprising feats, taught many, won over followers from among Jews and Greeks, was believed to be the Messiah, was accused by the Jewish leaders, was condemned to be crucified by Pilate, and was considered to be resurrected."3 Suetonius, Pliny the Younger, and Thallus also wrote about Christian worship and persecution that is consistent with New Testament accounts. Even the Jewish Talmud, certainly not biased toward Jesus, concurs about the major events of his life. From the Talmud, "we learn that Jesus was conceived out of wedlock, gathered disciples, made blasphemous claims about himself, and worked miracles, but these miracles are attributed to sorcery and not to God."4 This is remarkable information considering that most ancient historians focused on political and military leaders, not on obscure rabbis from distant provinces of the Roman Empire. Yet ancient historians (Jews, Greeks and Romans) confirm the major events that are presented in the New Testament, even though they were not believers themselves. |
![]() |
|
| ngc1514 | May 16 2009, 12:27 AM Post #2 |
![]()
Moderator
![]() ![]() ![]()
|
None, however, corroborate any miracles.
Since Tacitus was born in 55 CE (according to your post) his knowledge was not first hand knowledge and probably based on what those dying had to say. This says nothing about the reality of Jesus, just that the mythology about Jesus was known by his followers in Rome. Big whoop.
The infamous Testimonium de Christo in The Antiquities of the Jews. My copy of Josephus, copyright 1974 by the B'nai B'rith Commission has this to say about it:
Since Josephus was writing in particular about the history of the Jews, it's interesting there is no mention of the darkness that supposedly covered the land nor the temple tapestry being torn in two. Notice the passage (whatever the origin) only says "considered to be resurrected" not that he was. He also doesn't call Jesus rabbi - an odd omission for a Jew who was writing about the Jews; even his own followers called him such. John 3:2 is just one example.
The Talmudic tale of Jesus is even more interesting: http://judaism.about.com/od/beliefs/a/jesus.htm
I would have thought the main inconsistency would have been that Mary was not knocked up by god, but by Panderia, a Greek or Roman soldier rather than the Sanhedrin not being able to impose the death penalty. Was Jesus actually stoned and hung from a tree? A bit divergent from the biblical account. Or is your author just picking and choosing which parts of the Talmudic tale to accept or reject? Rather than a proud affirmation it looks like grasping at straws to me. Set 'em up and we can keep knocking 'em down! |
![]() |
|
| Deleted User | May 16 2009, 01:21 AM Post #3 |
|
Deleted User
|
"not first hand knowledge" None of the New Testament is written from first hand knowledge--oh, except for Paul being struck by lightning. |
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
|
|
| « Previous Topic · RV AND CAMPING DISCUSSION · Next Topic » |





![]](http://z3.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)





12:41 AM Jul 14
