Historical Evidence for Jesus of Nazareth

Posting so I can find this later tonight for a good read.

Thank you. :)

The more you contemplate the so-called "Flavian Theory", the more absurd it becomes. What the Flavian Theory is is a last desperate effort to deny the historical reality of Jesus of Nazareth. In fact it is so desperate and weak, it is akin to making an argument by pounding on the floor and rolling into a ball while sucking one's thumb.

Condensed history of the Bible.

[link to www.greatsite.com]

If folks would look back through history, God has used whomever He pleases to spread belief and The Word.

-King Cyrus (Old Testament - rebuild of Jersualem & the temple)

-Jesus, the Apostles & hundreds of disciples

-King Constantine, the Roman Empire and the Catholic Church

-The Bible in English starting around 1380 with John Wycliffe, then John Hus and later folks with great growth after the invention of the printing press.

[link to www.greatsite.com]

-Martin Luther & the Reformation

-Modern times & Internet

As of September 2016 the full Bible has been translated into 636 languages, and 3,223 languages have at least some portion of the Bible.

[link to en.wikipedia.org (secure)]

The Bible is by far THE most read AND most published book in the history of mankind!

Very good point OP. Men do not suffer pain to death in support of what they know is a lie. It simply does not work that way.

The only explanation could be is that they were hallucinating when they thought they saw a man named Jesus perform some miracles. However, there is a little problem with that approach. AFAIK, there is no such thing as group hallucinations.

IIRC, all but one of the Disciples met a brutal and tortured death--all without recanting their stories of their lORD.

You would think that logical questions would cause some reflection by atheists. I won't hold my breath. Generally, they are empty people.

I see no EVIDENCE for his existence in your article.

only the stupid assertion that rome persecuted christians therefor rome did not invent jesus.

MORON!

rome persecuted christians who did not adhere to the ROMAN story of jesus, but instead became either gnostic of Judaized.

jeesh... morons

It is also the most attacked and banned book in history.

To anyone who has even a cursory knowledge of the historical society, the Flavian Theory is as absurd to a real historian as the Flat Earth Theory to a professional astrophysicist.

so your only defence against the flavian theory is how much of a victim you think you were??

Is that why Pontius Pilate ordered Jesus of Nazareth crucified on the morning of April 13th AD 29?

No, the evidence is in how much of a victim antagonistic sources prove I was.

where is this written anywhere outside the NT?
or anywhere outside church fathers imaginative writings based on the NT?

YOU are not of that victim!

those victims are the christians who did not adhere to the ROMAN story of jesus, but instead chose the path of Judaizers or gnostics... so they were ofcourse persecuted for not believing the ROMAN story!

---------------------------------------------------


There are references to Jesus outside the bible.

Tacitus

[N]either human effort nor the emperor’s generosity nor the placating of the gods ended the scandalous belief that the fire had been ordered [by Nero]. Therefore, to put down the rumor, Nero substituted as culprits and punished in the most unusual ways those hated for their shameful acts … whom the crowd called “Chrestians.” The founder of this name, Christ [Christus in Latin], had been executed in the reign of Tiberius by the procurator Pontius Pilate … Suppressed for a time, the deadly superstition erupted again not only in Judea, the origin of this evil, but also in the city [Rome], where all things horrible and shameful from everywhere come together and become popular.5

Thank you for proving how oppressed and marginalized the protagonist witnesses were. This proves it isn't Roman propaganda in itself.

so... tacitus, speaking of chrisTIANS! decades after jesus, is a proof of jesus?

how is this not a proof of people buying the ROMAN PSY OP??

lol you are so desperate.

Is that why the canonical Apostles were all executed by Rome?

Flat Earthers think Round Earthers are desperate too.

There is a very good NT scholar, he has made a career out of exposing the BS in the NT, his name is Bart Ehrman and he is one of the worlds leading NT textual critics.

He tears Christian lies apart, watch some of his debates...


The interesting thing is that Bart Ehrman laughs at people that try to claim Jesus never existed, he tears that lie apart just as fast as he does the Christians that try to debate with him.

according to the NT propaganda lol.

rome - we killed the apostles (who we invented) so we dont back them up.
also dont forget it is us roman centurians who recognized jesus, it is us roman legions who saved paul from the J-ws, it is pilate who wanted to save jesus... keep rendering onto caesar and bowing to authority

you are illogical.

how about being not a desperate douche in regards to this discussion?

How is Tacitus a Roman psy-op when he wasn't even a Christian or promoting Christianity, but was a commissioned imperial Roman historian?

How about not resorting to ad hominem?

damn you are stupid.

tacitus was simply reporting on the presence of christIANS- the presence of christians does NOT prove the existence of jesus...

it could just as much mean that there are people who read the PSY OP gospels and believed it and are now christians.

omg your brain cant function when it is too busy loving jesus idol

So............... You did not read what he wrote?

Whatever, You believe what you want, but you make zero sense to anyone with a synapse firing.

If Christianity was a Roman contrivance and official state propaganda, why are the Christians always described as being something strange, or a curiosity to the Roman state?

It would be like Nazi Germany writing in distant and confused terms about the behaviors of that strange group of "Nazis".

thats easy.

because in order to make christianity the state religion rome had to let it GROW

but at the SAME TIME! use tactics the present rome AS IF it had nothing to do with it.

yes tacitus himself says the belief on the christians are a bunch of lies and superstitions.

which they are, but as an historian he wasnt in the know, he didnt know it was a roman made psy op, he thought they were just lies, but not roman psy op kind of lies.

Actually, Rome was trying to annihilate Christianity through the first three centuries until by the time of Constantine it was made the official state religion just so Constantine could contain, control, and manipulate it. And even then the persecution didn't stop.

Your theory is utterly absurd. As absurd as flat Earth Theory.

yeah rome tried so hard to destroy it... it never bothered to mess with the church in rome (vatican) which was all occupied by... FLAVIANS and other roman nobility.

and Im talking first and second century! way before constantine... the flavian.

OP why do atheist and agnostic NT scholars who call the church on their lies for a living, all in consensus that Jesus lived?

It's funny that i would usually be on your side of the fence, but i have read too much from scholars that i respect (most of them hated by the church for exposing their lies).