awww busybein thank you . . . that drink is badly needed.

these people think because we read the bible we left our brains on the doorstep.

Anytime they make i claim i google and sure enough the very exact claim word for word is plagiarised from the website of some charlatan.

Jesus is LORD over Bindex and co . . . they can shout all the want.

Kuns:

@tharma

So who told you that muslim's don't read the bible?

Bible and the Koran are essentially the same book?

Everything you find in the Koran is in the bible.

The Koran even as a chapter dedicated to the mother of Jesus (Isa) called Miriam or Mary.

and the bible mentions Jesus name more times than the name of the Prophet Muhammed.

Has the bible got a chapter dedicated to the mother of Jesus? No.

Many Muslim won't admit it, but when they are reading the Koran they are infact reading the bible to a certain extent.

Im aware of the similarities. My argument here is that if the Muslims of today could memorized the qur'an why wont the people of Jesus time memorized the accounts and then pass it from generation to generation before written down in a book. After all u dont need another account if one account can give all the (hopefullY) possible activities that might have occured. I

tharma:

I'm aware of the similarities. My argument here is that if the Muslims of today could memorized the qur'an why wont the people of Jesus time memorized the accounts and then pass it from generation to generation before written down in a book. After all u don't need another account if one account can give all the (hopefullY) possible activities that might have occured. I

Tharma, dont mind these hypocrites. Each time they make a critic its easy to see that they cant see beyond their noses. when they ask for "first hand account" i suppose they erroneously think Christ lived in the time when all the disciples needed was pencil and 40 leaves exercise book to document his every word.

In those days you wrote on parchments that were hard to find especially for the poor. Try taking down notes while dipping your pen in ink.

@tharma, I am not an alien. All I have posted are things people believed in even before Jesus was born. Now, can you explain why there is so much similarity with the Jesus story. Why did Jesus live a life that mirrored that of other gods that lived before His time.

Why all this talk about The Koran. If Christianity is partial blindness, then Islam is total blindness.

David will grasp at even thin air just not to concede, even when clearly beaten he deflects the argument, this is not about the egypt or other historical figures, it does not lend credibility to your argument when you leave the issue to attack something else, he just keeps slandering the word hypocrisy.
*sheesh*
Save your breath bindex even if you tell him his username has david he will tell you it contains Jesus.

Chrisbenogor:

David will grasp at even thin air just not to concede, even when clearly beaten he deflects the argument, this is not about the egypt or other historical figures, it does not lend credibility to your argument when you leave the issue to attack something else, he just keeps slandering the word hypocrisy.
*sheesh*
Save your breath bindex even if you tell him his username has david he will tell you it contains Jesus.

Shut up my friend. If you've something to contribute please do instead of this nauseating and pretentious bloviations.

[size=13pt]I challenged zoraro and other athiests here - provide concrete historical proof for the existence of Virishna and i will NEVER post in the religion section again.[/size]

Either take it up or let this be the last time another hypocrite comes here with high-fallutin names pretending to be knowledgeable about something.

Beaten by who? Bindex obviously has no clue about the works of Josephus beyond just rushing to wikipedia to look for talking points he thinks strengthen his cause.

Of course this thread is not about Egypt or other historical figures but dear hypocrite . . . it is fair game to make comparisons . . . if you believe the existence of Ceasar despite very sparse historical mentions and NO "first hand account" or "eyewitness" account . . . why the trouble in believing that Jesus existed? Where they both not contemporaries?

When next Bindex or any of your sidekicks come here to tell us that it is an "undisputed fact" that the works of Josephus are discredited, remind him that it is because of Josephus's accurate description of Jewish wars that we have Palestine today.

Chrisbenogor:

David will grasp at even thin air just not to concede, even when clearly beaten he deflects the argument, this is not about the egypt or other historical figures, it does not lend credibility to your argument when you leave the issue to attack something else, he just keeps slandering the word hypocrisy.
*sheesh*
Save your breath bindex even if you tell him his username has david he will tell you it contains Jesus.

That is assuming you even understand the meaning of the term "credibility".

It doesnt lend credibility to your argument when you make clearly stupid claims like Josephus is a fraud.

zoraro:

@tharma, I am not an alien. All I have posted are things people believed in even before Jesus was born. Now, can you explain why there is so much similarity with the Jesus story. Why did Jesus live a life that mirrored that of other gods that lived before His time.

Well I didnt all the things u have posted, and I couldnt fully comprehend what u are trying to say here. Similarity of the Jesus story with which story? Can u just summarized a bit of what u have posted ealier?

zoraro:

@tharma, I am not an alien. All I have posted are things people believed in even before Jesus was born. Now, can you explain why there is so much similarity with the Jesus story. Why did Jesus live a life that mirrored that of other gods that lived before His time.

Mr . . . there is no evidence for Virishna ever existing either as a dog or a god.

Next time you plagiarise talking points, research to be sure those people have their history accurate.

Have you seen my challenge? - [size=14pt]provide concrete historical proof for the existence of Virishna and i will NEVER post in the religion section again.[/size]

Surely if you use him to discredit Jesus it must be because you know he exists no? I'm waiting.

You people just come here with silly names to scare those who wont bother to do research . . .

[size=14pt]With 25 million copies sold every yr . . . the bible remains America's top selling book of all time even though 90% of all households have at least 1 copy.

If it hurts you pls break a leg.[/size]

Kuns what is d difference between ur story and the fairy tales of Oduduwa and Oladumare?

Dios,

You are not the only one with a critical mind, but there are not many nigerians out there who are willing to scrutinize this god thing.
Nigerians should grow up because time waits for no one. The westerners are far in front of Africa partly because we cling to the hulabalu tales they brought to us to ripe us of our wealth.

I posted a thread here a few months ago https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-190475.0.html and the responses were all religious fanatic nigerians.

David your smoke screens are becoming too weak and light.
What and who is a hypocrite?
Save your ad hominem arguments for the emotionally gullible like your side kicks, just how does the existence of Jaja of opobo affect Jesus now?
Pilgrim did this a lot and I dubbed it the pilgrim block, but at least she did it well, you pathetically suck at it so drop the theatrics.
You brought from wikipedia, he also showed you that the work was disputed as a forgery from the same wikipedia, fair game, move on and stop acting like a magician. Plus you are really butchering the word hypocrite, surely you can do better than that.

And we have asked you to give us one rational and logically correct intellectual argument for the existence of God, you failed to do that, your brain is surely outside your doorstep.

davidylan:

Here is the problem with this liars . . .

Testimonium Flavianum is alleged to be disputed or discredited . . . WHY? Simply because it is a potent weapon that destroys the claims that Jesus never existed since it makes prominent mention of Him.

HOWEVER

Jospephus writes ANOTHER work that is curiously NEVER disputed or discredited - The Jewish War
This work details the war history of the Jews right up to the Roman-Jewish war of AD 70 and the destruction of the temple by Emperor Hadrian.

Now this work is UNIMPEACHABLE because there is enormous archeological evidence to support the war of AD 70 at least. It is from this war that the name "Palestine" came about.

Now isnt it incredulous that one work of Josephus is allegedly "discredited" and another is not?

There is a serious flaw in this argument.

1. You are dodging Bindex points, he gave the reasons why Flavius' account were disputed but you are only responding with a wild accusation as to the reason why his writings were disputed, you are sounding like those who are being prosecuted for corruption and give the reason why they are being prosecuted as persecution rather than considering their misdeeds.

2. You have answered the question about why his other works were accepted "because there is enormous archeological evidence" haba, you don't throw out the baby with the bath water now. The fact that his account was right on one occasion does not mean his account will always be right. Why enormous archeological record no dey to prove jesus' case? God no dey powerful enough?

_{quote from davidylan}

i'll start with this . . . I have several historically accurate accounts. An interesting thing to note about these accounts are that they do NOT contradict each other even though many are written by jewish, roman and greek historians . . . all writing from different perspectives  

And i also have Historical accounts that dispute that. I think it's more mainstream to assume a man existed, but that doesn't make it anymore true. Since there is little or no evidence that a person named Jesus existed except what the Gospels say.We do find that Matthew and Luke alter Mark in ways that suggest they are writing for different purposes and different audiences. However, I do not think that that explanation satisfactorily explains why, for example, Matthew would write about post-resurrection appearances in Galilee but Luke write about them in Jerusalem.

The Gospel of Mark and the Gospel of John do not include a nativity narrative or any hint that Jesus was born in Bethlehem, and refer to him only as being from Nazareth.[22] In a 2005 article in Archaeology magazine, archaeologist Aviram Oshri pointed to the absence of evidence of settlement of the area at the time when Jesus was born.

If Jesus was about 30 years old and was killed by Pontius Pilate then as written by mathew subtracting 30 years would put his birth at the time of Herod's reign. Yet there's a big problem here. Luke also mentions that Jesus was born around the time of the census of Cyrenius. This was 10 years after Herod died!

The Birth Narratives are so different and contain somany details that fail to agree that one must conclude that they had been invented not written based on the OT.

The stories of Jesus' crucifiction also differ. Could there have been and earthquake and so on and  only one goslpel writier heard about it? Come to that, an earthquake would get into Roman records but there is no sign of it even though they are known to have very good documentation of events.

_{quote from davidylan}

the idea that there MUST be a "first hand account" is nothing but a desperate attempt to throw up a smokescreen where there is none. Very few events in ancient history actually have "first hand accounts". For example there is NO "first hand account" of the existence of the pharoahs or the building of the pyramids . . . what we have are accounts written centuries after they died . . . HOWEVER we KNOW the Pharoahs existed because we have been able to unearth their graves.  

This is very lame I say. I have always had a hard time understanding why the Jews in the presence of Jesus and who were looking for a Messiah and were primed and ready to receive one, totally rejects Jesus who is performing miracles, raising the dead, etc.Besides there are no roman records of Jesus being arrested or killed.

_{quote from davidylan}

Matthew, Mark and John were written by DISCIPLES who walked with Christ . . . the fact that they wrote their accounts 10-30 years after his death does not detract from the almost precise similarity in their works  

Consider Matthew and Luke's versions of events that are not told in Mark. For example, Mark does not include any birth narratives, genealogies, or post-resurrection stories. Tellingly, Matthew and Luke's versions of these differ radically, often to the point of contradiction  The wrote very different and very conflicting account of events.

_{quote from davidylan}

2. For the last 3 years He was an itinerant preacher, despised by the Jews, hated by the pharisees who called Him a blasphemer, regarded by many as "is this not the son of Joseph the carpenter?" and killed by the high priests . . . why would any historian be interested in penning down details of such an ordinary fellow?  

Like i said he was'nt an ordinary fellow. He was alleged to have raised the dead, cured the sick, tured water into wine, had a lot of followers, preached in so many places.(Infact he was known as a rebel as you just put, most rebels are well know not ordinary people) Why are you lying that he is an ordinary guy? nobody that has the ability to raise the dead will be considered as an ordinary guy.

_{quote from davidylan}

It was not until the christian movement became a potent force among the gentile world that historians began to take notice.

3. We do not have "first hand accounts" of Herod, Pontius Pilate, Ceasar . . . BUT we know from archeological evidence that they existed.

we don't have conflicting accounts of their existence do we?


_{quote from davidylan}

We have WAY MORE recorded history about the life of Jesus than we have of Julius Ceasar and Herod YET these hypocrites NEVER seem to question whether they existed.  

Non of them ever claimed to have healed the sick, raised the dead or to be God the creator of the universe. so why bother finding out anything about them?

tharma:

I'm aware of the similarities. My argument here is that if the Muslims of today could memorized the qur'an why wont the people of Jesus time memorized the accounts and then pass it from generation to generation before written down in a book. After all u don't need another account if one account can give all the (hopefullY) possible activities that might have occured. I

Hypocrisy galore, if you are now beleiving stories that have been passed from mouth to mouth by the jews, why don't you beleive the stories of your own people, why not beleive in Esu laalu, Ogun, Oya, Sango e.t.c?

@david
Are the smoke grenades finishing? I seriously doubt, I know you went for a reload, hopefully your armoury is not too far away.
Bindex please how does the other work Josephus wrote affect that which was forged? Am I the only one seeing that this guy is trying to pull a cris angel levitation and failing woefully at it.

_{from davidylan}

Isnt it a disgrace to make the oft discredited claim that the only people authorised to write about Jesus must be "eyewitnesses"? When we talk of Matthew, Mark and John . . . we suddenly hear another story entirely.

You believe Tutahnkhamun existed . . . were are the eyewitnesses?

you say Ceasar existed . . . where are the eyewitnesses?

Gallileo existed? . . . who was his eyewitness?

I can go on and on . . . but no need burning myself out over hypocrites.  


 

The only hipocrite here is you. you lied that Jesus was an ordinary guy when all the biblical accounts showed that he was'nt.

You brought the name of Tutahnkhamun, can you please tell me who he is?

The only person trying to break his neck about Ceasar existence is you, why should i care if he existed or not, he was never alleged to have raised any body from the dead, tured water into wine and claim to be the saviour of the world, did he? by the way who is Ceaser? care to tell us about him?

Gallieo had writtings of his own, where are that of Jesus?

As I aforementioned the only hypocrite here is you. As for mathew and co why should we believe their accounts when they are contradictory? besides they never claimed any athourship of any of the text.

Chrisbenogor:

@david
Are the smoke grenades finishing? I seriously doubt, I know you went for a reload, hopefully your armoury is not too far away.
Bindex please how does the other work Josephus wrote affect that which was forged? Am I the only one seeing that this guy is trying to pull a cris angel levitation and failing woefully at it.

The guy is a militant  , he will do and say anything to make his point. He has predetermined answers for everything, and is quick to use the word hypocrite with out knowing its meaning when he is clearly a very good defination of the word, when wikipedia support his claims he quickly uses it, when it does'nt he discards it and says ohh Its from wikipedia hence it lacks credibility ,same with science. He will go to any length to prove his point, he even uses imaginary conceptions to prove his point but shouts that people should provide scientific facts or evidence to support theirs, when asked to explain certian issues or events he clearly does'nt know or can't provide answers to he shouts its a miracle, but keeps telling others to provide rational scientific evidence for theirs. What an interesting guy.

davidylan:

[size=14pt]With 25 million copies sold every yr . . . the bible remains America's top selling book of all time even though 90% of all households have at least 1 copy.

If it hurts you please break a leg.[/size]

Same with the Koran, The Koran remains the top selling book in Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Eygypt etc even though over 95% of households have at least 2 copies. If it hurts your break you neck.

@tharma, My posts are clear enough for you to understand just read them again. If you've shut your eyes to the truth how will you see it.

It is the truth that Jesus was not the first god to have been born by a virgin (By myths of course).

It is true that Jesus was not the first to be resurrected three days after he died.

It is true that December 25th is also the birthday of many Sun gods.

It is true that Jesus was not the first to be the Alpha and omega. e.t.c.

@davidylan, should I also "provide concrete historical proof for the existence" of Horus,Bacchus,Khrishna, Buddha, Laokiun along with that for Virishna or the other many gods that share some similar personality or events with Jesus.

duduspace:

There is a serious flaw in this argument.

1. You are dodging Bindex points, he gave the reasons why Flavius' account were disputed but you are only responding with a wild accusation as to the reason why his writings were disputed, you are sounding like those who are being prosecuted for corruption and give the reason why they are being prosecuted as persecution rather than considering their misdeeds.

All he did was copy this from wikipedia - The authenticity of the Testimonium Flavianum has been disputed since the 17th century, and by the mid 18th century the consensus view was that it was a forgery. This conclusion was questioned in the 20th century and the intellectual controversy will probably never be resolved.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

Pray . . . were are the REASONS there? I know you must support a fellow athiest but WERE ARE THE REASONS for disputing the authenticity of one work of Flavius without disputing the others?

duduspace:

2. You have answered the question about why his other works were accepted "because there is enormous archeological evidence" haba, you don't throw out the baby with the bath water now. The fact that his account was right on one occasion does not mean his account will always be right. Why enormous archeological record no dey to prove jesus' case? God no dey powerful enough?

Exactly the reason your own argument holds no water . . . if Josephus was a fraud . . . why are his other works regarded as historical fact?

Why are there no enormous archeological evidence to prove the case of the tons of other men of history whose accounts of existence you take as gospel truth?

Ceasar has far less historical record as Jesus but there are FILMS about Ceasar, his name is used as common place today and it is generally accepted that he existed . . . why is the yardstick different with Jesus Christ?

The rest of the bloviators who only come out of the woodwork when there is a crowd of substanceless argumentators i would simply ignore.

zoraro:

@tharma, My posts are clear enough for you to understand just read them again. If you've shut your eyes to the truth how will you see it.

It is truth that Jesus was not the first god to have been born by a virgin (By myths of course).

It is true that Jesus was not the first to be resurrected three days after he died.

It is true that December 25 is also the birthday of many Sun gods

It is true that Jesus was not the first to be the Alpha and omega. e.t.c.

@davidylan, should I also "provide concrete historical proof for the existence" of Horus,Bacchus,Khrishna, Buddha, Laokiun along with that for  Virishna or the other many gods that share some similar personality or events with Jesus.

The problem is that they didn't have  some of those properties. Some of the theories propounded by Acharya are crap. The claims made by her (I think it's a her) and some others are pure invention. For example Krishna was not crucified. He died from being accidentally shot with an arrow. Osiris was not called Christ. The Egyptian word KRST has something to do with burial not anointing.

This isn't to say that there isn't some Sun god elements thrown in. The crown of thorns, halo, rising from the dead, Turing water into wine, Son of God and walking on water look to be descriptions of the sun God.  Almost everything written about Jesus is midrashic in nature. He's basically a combination of Joshua, Elijah-Elisha, and the nation of Israel with a heaping of Essene theology thrown in for good measure. The authors were highly influenced by the prophets, yet did a half-assed job of portraying him as the Messiah. No doubt the Gentiles they were writing to didn't know and/or care about the Jewish Messiah so only enough to wow to ignorant was put into the gospels. Some of the stories were created around Jewish feasts like Yom Kippur, Sukkoth, and Peshach.

Most likely Jesus was intended from the outset to be an allegory, but he took on a life of his own.

zoraro:

@davidylan, should I also "provide concrete historical proof for the existence" of Horus,Bacchus,Khrishna, Buddha, Laokiun along with that for Virishna or the other many gods that share some similar personality or events with Jesus.

thou hypocrite . . . Virishna is enough . . . all i need is ONE PROOF that he ever existed.

Chrisbenogor:

@david
Are the smoke grenades finishing? I seriously doubt, I know you went for a reload, hopefully your armoury is not too far away.
Bindex please how does the other work Josephus wrote affect that which was forged? Am I the only one seeing that this guy is trying to pull a cris angel levitation and failing woefully at it.

I went to play computer games . . . my life does not revolve around responding to intellectual dimwits all day alone. Thank God for the holidays.

Ok listen you people with herd mentality . . . all of a sudden you are now chorusing the Josephus is a forgery refrain based on 3 lines of wikipedia entry?

Josephus wrote tons of other works . . . why is JUST ONE regarded as a forgery?

Josephus entry about Christ is less than 1% . . the remaining 99% mention specific events and people that are historically accurate . . .

Testimonium Flavianum is just one part of his work - Antiquities of the Jews which contains only 2 mentions of Jesus Christ. The rest of the work is accurate . . . what proof then does Bindex have for calling it a forgery?

The writer of the New Testament.

Josephus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A Roman portrait bust said to be of JosephusJosephus (AD 37 – c. 100),[1] also known as Yosef Ben Matityahu (Joseph, son of Matthias) and, after he became a Roman citizen, as Titus Flavius Josephus,[2] was a first-century Jewish historian and apologist of priestly and royal ancestry who survived and recorded the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. His works give an important insight into first-century Judaism.

Josephus's two most important works are The Jewish War (c. 75) and Antiquities of the Jews (c. 94).[3] The Jewish War recounts the Jewish revolt against Rome (66–70). Antiquities of the Jews recounts the history of the world from a Jewish perspective. These works provide valuable insight into the background of first century Judaism and early Christianity.[3]

There are two extant references in Josephus on Jesus, the one directly concerning Jesus has come to be known as the Testimonium Flavianum. These passages appear in The Antiquities of the Jews, written in the year 93 by the Jewish historian Josephus. All extant copies of this work, which all derive from Christian sources, even the recently recovered Arabic version, contain the two passages about Jesus. The authenticity of the Testimonium Flavianum has been disputed since the 17th century, and by the mid 18th century the consensus view was that it was a forgery. The other passage simply mentions Jesus as the brother of James, also known as James the Just. Though most scholars consider this passage genuine [1], its authenticity has been disputed by Emil Schürer as well by several recent popular writers.

Josephus' other major work, The Jewish War, makes no mention of Jesus.

davidylan:

All he did was copy this from wikipedia - The authenticity of the Testimonium Flavianum has been disputed since the 17th century, and by the mid 18th century the consensus view was that it was a forgery. This conclusion was questioned in the 20th century and the intellectual controversy will probably never be resolved.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus

Pray . . . were are the REASONS there? I know you must support a fellow athiest but WERE ARE THE REASONS for disputing the authenticity of one work of Flavius without disputing the others?

Here they are(from another source)

Arguments for the interpolation of this passage consist of the following: (1) Problems of textual conformity between manuscripts, (2) peculiar placement in the text, (3) odd use of Josephan language, (4) the use of pro-Christian language, (5) lack of mention specifically in any other earlier Christian source including Justin Martyr and Origen, (6) the earliest attestation we have, that of Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical Histories, he places the Testimonium after Josephus’ account of John the Baptist, and finally (7) Eusebius has an alternate version of the text himself in another work.

The problems of conformity of the manuscripts are a huge deal, although generally not touched upon by dissenters of the Josephan controversy over the Testimonium. The first attestation to this passage is found in the forth century, and even then it seems to not have been set in stone, as Steve Mason[1] cites that Jerome (p. 230) had a different version of the transcript in his Lives of Illustrious Men, and in the 10th century yet an additional manuscript is found in Agapius (ibid.). But it doesn’t stop there, as Michael, the Patriarch of Antioch quotes another variant text in the 12th century. So many alterations exist. Mason asks, “Where did such equivocal versions of Josephus’ account come from?” (p. 231) And not least of all, the fact that there are alternative translations which exist from Robert Eisler[2] and John P. Meier[3] spark additional questions. Why are there no copies of Josephus before Eusebius in the fourth century for scholarship to adequately translate? Perhaps Christians didn’t feel the need to preserve it beforehand, and that should raise additional red flags.

The peculiar placement of the text is additionally odd. Looking at the text from a distance, without really comparing the accounts of the context around the Testimonium, it may seem possible that it fits. It does deal with Pilate, that is for sure, and certainly it contains accounts of followers of a cult, referred to as a “tribe,” that Josephus didn’t hold to, much like those of the cult of Isis he discusses a section down. But further examination reveals a troubling reality. After Pilate arrives in Judea, Josephus follows with two incidents; (a) Pilate allows the Roman images into Jerusalem during the night, and (b) Pilate’s use of temple funds to build an aqueduct. Immediately following the Testimonium, (c) Josephus discusses the destruction of the temple of Isis and the crucifixion of Egyptian priests, (d) Jews are expelled from Rome because of Jewish troublemakers, and (e) Pilate destroyed the Samaritan movement and their settlement at Gerizim. Mason states that, “Like a tourist negotiating a bustling, raucous Middle-Eastern market who accidentally walks through the door of a monastery, suffused with light and peace, the reader of Josephus is struck by this sublime portrait.” (p. 227) Events (a), (b) and (e) involve incidents that look unfavorably upon Pilate, but the Testimonium blames the fiasco of the crucifixion not on Pilate—who seems more like a puppet being played—but on the “denunciation by the leading men among us.” Every single event save for the Testimonium in Antiquities 18 is described as some form of outrage or uprising, yet there is no tumultuous event here, no uprising to speak of. Overall, Mason makes the observance that “he is pointing out the follow of Jewish rebels, governors, and troublemakers,” (ibid.) yet in the Testimonium, Josephus speaks highly of Jesus and his followers, a stark contrast to the rest of the context. Finally, Josephus starts the section concerning the Isis temple as “another outrage,” for which George A. Wells[4] and others have argued both events (b) and (c) to have originally been adjacent, leaving the probability for the Testimonium to have been inserted later.[5]

The debate over the language of the Testimonium has been all over the place, to say the least. The hard fact is, however, that the passage reeks of Josephus but in a completely bizarre manner and at the same time seems to resemble normal Christian apologia. Mason cites several words and phrases which seem Josephan until considered in context;[6] that being “doer (ποιετες) of wonderful deeds,”[7] “they did not cease,” “he was perhaps the Christ (Χριστος)” and “tribe (Φψλε) of the Christians.” The use and language of these words does not fit into the normal Josephan style, and even in the case that they were Josephan in style they would not fit into how Josephus used the terms,[8] they are missing further explanation, or would make little sense to his intended audience; the Greeks and Romans who would be fully unaware of the meaning behind “Christ.” In the same manner, the high regard in which he holds Christ, even in the regard that our earliest attestation, Eusebius, has him being referred to specifically as Christ is downright ridiculous. Not only is the language reflective of a Christian apologist in the forth century, but it doesn’t sound like something a first century pious Jew would write, especially in the context that Josephus was writing in (Jewish apologetics).

Silence is golden except when one is trying to prove their God existed, and then one should want to be as loud with information as possible. Yet early Christians seemed to be loud on everything except the Testimonium, which would have been completely revolutionary in terms of evidence in the early Christian centuries, especially against Trypho, Celsus and Prophyry. Yet strangely the reader of the polemics against these pagans seems to be missing the Testimonium, even though they cite from Josephus over and over again. Mason writes that “Origen expressed his wonder that the Jewish historian ‘did not accept that our Jesus is Christ’,” (p. 229) which is accurate. But there is more troubling information to consider here. That nowhere does Origen ever cite or attempt to cite anything remotely close to the Testimonium is damning. Instead one only sees reference to James, in which Origen seems to have recalled that Josephus referred to Jesus as “the one called Christ.”[9] It is odd that this appears only in Origen and not before. For example, this passage is never brought up by Justin Martyr in his dialog with Trypho. What else is odd is that out of the blue you have Ananus killing James. The apologist would have one believe that he killed James because Jesus was his brother, but what purpose would that have served? Instead, looking at the context another probability possibility itself, and seems to be the more probable.

 

Exactly the reason your own argument holds no water . . . if Josephus was a fraud . . . why are his other works regarded as historical fact?

Why are there no enormous archeological evidence to prove the case of the tons of other men of history whose accounts of existence you take as gospel truth?

Ceasar has far less historical record as Jesus but there are FILMS about Ceasar, his name is used as common place today and it is generally accepted that he existed . . . why is the yardstick different with Jesus Christ?

The rest of the bloviators who only come out of the woodwork when there is a crowd of substanceless argumentators i would simply ignore.

As for Ceaser Arcehologist have found a tomb and a plate with his name written on it, I will look it up and post a link. I repeat Ceaser was not claimed to have raised any body from the dead, he wa Just a king and never claimed to have supernatural powers so whay should people bother to know anything about him? he never claimed to be the creator of the world that came into it as a man did he?I dont think there was nothing about him that was supernatural are there?

Thanks Kuns for bringing this out . . . now we can tackle it for the illogical drivel it really is . . .

Kuns:

The writer of the New Testament.

Josephus
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

A Roman portrait bust said to be of JosephusJosephus (AD 37 – c. 100),[1] also known as Yosef Ben Matityahu (Joseph, son of Matthias) and, after he became a Roman citizen, as Titus Flavius Josephus,[2] was a first-century Jewish historian and apologist of priestly and royal ancestry who survived and recorded the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. His works give an important insight into first-century Judaism.

How can someone regarded as a fraud who produces forgeries be the one whose work gives "important insight into first-century Judaism"?

Even a 5-yr old will laugh at Bindex's low acumen.

Kuns:

Josephus's two most important works are The Jewish War (c. 75) and Antiquities of the Jews (c. 94).[3] The Jewish War recounts the Jewish revolt against Rome (66–70). Antiquities of the Jews recounts the history of the world from a Jewish perspective. These works provide valuable insight into the background of first century Judaism and early Christianity.[3]

There are two extant references in Josephus on Jesus, the one directly concerning Jesus has come to be known as the Testimonium Flavianum. These passages appear in The Antiquities of the Jews, written in the year 93 by the Jewish historian Josephus. All extant copies of this work, which all derive from Christian sources, even the recently recovered Arabic version, contain the two passages about Jesus. The authenticity of the Testimonium Flavianum has been disputed since the 17th century, and by the mid 18th century the consensus view was that it was a forgery.

Note that the SOLE REASON this work is disputed as a forgery is based ENTIRELY on the fact that it contains 2 references to Jesus. A fact that blows out of the water, the fraudulent argument that Christ never existed.

Kuns:

The other passage simply mentions Jesus as the brother of James, also known as James the Just. Though most scholars consider this passage genuine [1],

Note the confusion . . . one reference to Christ is a forgery, the other is genuine?  
Are these people sane at all?

Kuns:

its authenticity has been disputed by Emil Schürer as well by several recent popular writers.

Note those disputing Josephus here are RECENT writers who of course have an axe to grind with the christian movement itself.

Kuns:

Josephus' other major work, The Jewish War, makes no mention of Jesus.

It is NOT SURPRISING that this work is NEVER disputed as a forgery.

Go figure.

bindex:

Here they are(from another source)

Its pointless . . . Antiquities of the Jews is a long piece of work . . . how come one tiny passage regarding Christ is the one regarded as a forgery and the other genuine?

bindex:

As for Ceaser Arcehologist have found a tomb and a plate with his name written on it, I will look it up and post a link. I repeat Ceaser was not claimed to have raised any body from the dead, he wa Just a king and never claimed to have supernatural powers so whay should people bother to know anything about him? he never claimed to be the creator of the world that came into it as a man did he?I don't think there was nothing about him that was supernatural are there?

I also posted a link to a tomb found with Ossuaries in it that bears the inscription . . . James the brother of Jesus.

So the only reason you believe in the existence of Ceasar but not Christ EVEN THOUGH BOTH HAVE SIMILAR ARCHEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL EVIDENCE (CHRIST EVEN MORE) is because Ceasar never claimed to be God?

Now we are getting a clearer picture of your problems now. Its not an issue of innaccuracies, forgeries or lack of evidence . . . you just wish the very idea of God will just go away. Sorry it wont.

The New Testament, the Church, and Christianity were all creations of Calpurnius Piso’s family, who were Roman Aristocrats.

The New Testament and all the characters in it, including Jesus, all the Josephs, all the Mary’s, all the Disciples, Apostles, Paul, and John the Baptist are fictional.

The Piso’s created the story and the characters and they tied the story into a specific time and place in history.

Then they connected it with some peripheral actual people, such as the Herods, Gamaliel, the Roman procurators, etc. But Jesus and everyone involved with him were created (that is, fictional!) characters. The whole story of Jesus was made up as a big play by the Romans, and Jesus was made a hero savior by Piso.

The story of Joseph in Egypt was rewritten, then inserted into the Gospel of Jesus. Isn’t that a coincidence? The story came from Tama-Re (Egypt), and this is something I’ve been telling you for years.

This is what the roman historian are saying today. Right , you go figure ,

@Davidlan,

Where did you get go figure and Nuff said from what David dangelo.

Just be yourself, stop pretending to be someone you're not.

Mr hypocrite, how do I prove something that did not exist. I never said that Virishna existed. It is a fact that people worshiped Him though long before the birth of Jesus. Virishna and Jesus are myths created by people. That you believe one and not the other is interesting.