(Untitled)

[transformergeek]

Hello,

I've heard people speak of documents that are used to prove the historical existence of Jesus. Does anyone know anything about this? What historical proof do we have, other than The Bible, that Jesus walked The Earth?

Thanks!

Comments

[foxmagic]

Using the Bible as historical evidence of Jesus's life would be like using the Harry Potter books as historical evidence of Harry Potter's life. What's needed are independent accounts to corroborate the details and find out what's fact and what's fiction.

[foxmagic]

I don't understand what you mean when you say "the historicity of the Bible has been authenticated" - could you explain?

[foxmagic]

I'm not sure what you mean by two words in particular: 'historicity' and 'authenticated'. Mainly because a great deal of the Bible conflicts with known history in numerous ways, both trivial and significant. Rather than enumerating them here, I'll point you to [[The Bible and history]] for examples.

So I'm not sure what you mean by 'historicity' when the Bible is more figurative than literal, and I'm not sure what you mean by 'authenticated' when many of the alleged historical details in the Bible are contradicted by archaeology and other historical records.

[ysgawen]

Although there are historical facts in the Bible, there are also a lot of serious errors and although I have no doubt Jesus existed (since He still exists and therefore must have done), if you use the Bible as a historical document to impress those who are looking for serious evidence, you will be laughed at. The flood did not cover the Earth, only a large area in the Middle East (Egypt, for eaxample, was not involved). Empires are mentioned in the Bible at times when they did not yet exist. Bethsaida is described as being in Galilee, when it was actually in the province of Gaulontinis. David is alleged to have taken the head of Goliath to Jerusalem. Since his people did not have Jerusalem at the time, that seems a little odd. He was, in fact, 15 years too early. Nebuchadnezzar was not the father of Belshazzar. Joseph avoided Judea because it was ruled by one of Herod's sons. He went to Galilee instead, which was ruled by a son of Herod

[martiancyclist]

According to a sermon I heard a couple weeks ago, the number of male children under two in Bethlehem at the time is estimated to have been somewhere around twenty. That does somewhat explain how such a thing could pass under the radar.

[foxmagic]

Just curious - do you know where that estimate came from? I've never heard that before...

[martiancyclist]

I don't know where the preacher got it from, but it did seem reasonable -- he said what the population was, approximately, of Bethlehem, then the approximate number of those under age two, then half of that. I don't remember the other numbers, unfortunately. I'd never heard it before either. I can ask him, if you don't mind waiting until next week sometime.

[transformergeek]

Socrates never claimed to have broken any of the laws of nature. Also, Plato's writings don't contain an absurdly high number of inconsistencies.

Jesus did claim to have broken the laws of nature (i.e. performed miracles). Also, The Bible does contain an absurdly high number of inconsistencies.

The Harry Potter Books claim that Harry Potter broke the laws of nature. The Harry Potter books don't contain an absurdly high number of inconsistencies.

I'd say there's really no real reason to question the validity of Plato's writing. I'd also say that the Harry Potter books are more historically reliable than The Bible, because at least its got it's stories straight.

[transformergeek]

1) So whenever anyone answers me a question I don't think I can address, I can just say "Oh, someone already answered that, and it's beneath me, so I'm not going to bother." Thanks for the help.

2) No, your syllogism's a little off. You have a real knack at dodging and evading and misconstructing people's arguments. What I was actually saying was:

A) Both The Bible and Harry Potter contain events that defy the laws of nature and common logic.
B) Events that defy the laws of nature and logic simply cannot happen.
C) Therefore The Bible and Harry Potter could not have happened.

3) The REAL issue isn't being addressed? Would you be kind enough to come off of your pedestal and let me know what the "REAL" issue is?

[transformergeek]

The historicity of the Bible has been authenticated. Yes the events that it notes are subject to validating the historicity of an event (ie the census when Christ was born, the slaying of the innocents, the unusual weather on Good Friday), however it is not a valid move to disregard it and so to say, "apart from the Bible" is as much to say that you would take an irresponsible approach to the text.

Any work of fiction can reference factual events. The mere fact that The Bible mentioned things that actually happened doesn't count as proof of it's authenticity, just like I can't say that Superman must be real, because there were references to World War II, and The Cold War, and even The Twin Towers falling in Action Comics.

[aefenglommung]

I believe the New Testament is what is considered a "primary source" in the Real World.

Considering that Paul's Letters can be reliably dated to within 20-30 years of the dates given for Jesus of Nazareth, this is astonishingly close in terms of primary documents about a historical figure from antiquity, particularly one who was not a political figure.

And as Paul says in the Book of Acts (written within the lifespan of the first generation of Christians, certainly, and within 30 years of Jesus, probably), "these things were not done in a corner." He stood public trial before all kinds of people who would have destroyed his case if they could -- and they couldn't.

What it boils down to is, if we cannot be sure that Jesus of Nazareth actually lived in the time given, then we cannot be sure that Caesar lived, or Boudicca, or Socrates, or most of the other people we are sure actually walked around on this earth. All scholars from the Real World understand this.