Did Jesus exist? Did Abraham exist?
Ben C Davis
Chris McClinch <y...@somehost.somedomain> wrote in article
<5h7cm9$9qg$2...@solaris.cc.vt.edu>...
> One piece of evidence that many overlook is that no one attempted to claim that
> Jesus did not exist until the twentieth century. It seems to me that if he did
> not really exist, then the Jews of the first and second century would have had
> an awful lot to gain by pointing it out. Why didn't they if he did not exist.
In 1840 Bruno Bauer wrote how Jesus was a myth, that JC came
from the evaluation of Greek, Jewish and Roman theology. In 1863
Ernest Renan upset the masses with his 'Life of Jesus' and the
problems with the Gospels. The "Catholic Church" excommunicated
a number of persons for exposesing the truth over the years.
Remember the printing press? Gutenberg? It took sometime but
by the 1700's Bolingbroke and Volney were on the road to enlightment.
In 1808 Napoleon and Wieland discussed this subject.
There are a number of exposes by ex-priest who have had access to
the many church records.
> What, by the way, is your evidence that there was no historical Christ? I
> would be very interested in hearing it. Most of the attempts at explaining
> Jesus's nonhistoricity fall flat.
There are no records of JC before A.D.125+-10. None. If there are
records, please dig them up and quote them. Now what?
Ben 8)
It can be Hell when a person finds out about Santa.
----
[There are a number of records. These include the entire NT, as well
as early documents such as Clement and Ignatius. The 125 date might
be for the first manuscript (fragment) that currently survives, which
is a different thing from when the originals were written. Since the
Fathers writing around the turn of the Cent give every evidence of
being second or third generation members of a fairly widespread group,
you'd end up needing quite a conspiracy for your theory to be true.
--clh]
Lane Core Jr.
[to soc.religion.christian]
On 4 Apr 1997 00:07:24 -0500, "Ben C Davis" <bda...@clarkston.com>
wrote the following:
[....]
>There are no records of JC before A.D.125+-10. None. If there are
>records, please dig them up and quote them. Now what?
Oh, my.
I'm quite sure the moderator won't let us post the New Testament in
its entirety. ;)
********************************
Mr. Lane Core Jr. elc...@sgi.net
http://users.sgi.net/~elcore
"Heart Speaks to Heart"
********************************
"No one likes bad news,
no one welcomes what condemns him;
the world slanders the Truth in self-defence,
because the Truth denounces the world."
John Henry Newman,
"The Salvation of the Hearer the Motive of the Preacher" (1849)
BUSHBADEE
i would like to answere you point by point by I cant transfer your
document to this letter.
1 There were many claims that jesus did not exist before the 19th cent.
Your question as to why jews did not refute in the first two centuries is
similer to mine, Except I include 19 centuries.
If you read the gospels the romans held his hand to the cross, held nails
to it and hammered it in. Yet thier descendents refuse to accept
responsibility for it and try to pass it off.
I have asked many rabbi's why they did not point this out. They said it
was becuase they did not want to increase the oppression. I have found
its there in thier bible and yet they do not see it. They have a blind
spot.
Ex priests
The vatican is well aware that christ did not exist.
The kj is so bad because large parts of the vatican library was not
available to its writers
Proof of no christ.
It is very difficult to prove some thing did not exist.
Do you have a singe document from his time that can be carbon dated ( to
prove its not a forgery. ) that says he or his miricles existed,
Just one.
Actually there are a number of proofs that he didn't exist and they are
righrt in the KJ. These are discripancies with recorded history. They
can not even prove his birth date becsuse the dates of rule of the roman
appointed kings is off from known and recorded history.
By the way we can now prove things we couldn't a hundred years ago.
Take Columbus. A hundred or so years ago a monk was excommunicated for
saying Col wasn't Italian, that he was a spanish jew. His reason was COL
did not talk like an Italian
Now we know he was right. We can even tell what provence in spain he was
from
by his phraseology, and idiomology by the use of computers. We do this
all the time, we tell where a person is from by his accent. We can even
get a good idea of his profession by his use of personel pronouns
I am afraid to say the efforts have not fallen flat. Look at the latest
findings from the dead sea schrools. There is an excellent cd on the dead
sea scroles that goes into this.
When you say the new testiment. Which of the hundred or so versions are
you talking about. The oldest complete Christian NT is the Sinaiticus and
that dates from about 350 ad
Its easy to say that this document comes from an earlier one but that is
called hearsay and it doesn't hold up in court or in scientific circles.
But you did have a conspriacy. It was called the catholic church. They
destroyed thousands of books that would prove other than thier current
belief.
I believe Tishendorf found somthing like 14,800 changes to the codx
sinaiticus in 1865. That seems like a conspiracy to me. Its called
adherence to the doctrines of the faith. They used to excomunicate you or
burn you at the stake for it.
William M Klimon
On 6 Apr 1997, BUSHBADEE wrote:
> Ex priests
> The vatican is well aware that christ did not exist.
This is simply rank nonsense. There is perhaps no one in history who has
preached Jesus Christ to more people than Pope John Paul II, now
gloriously reigning!
> The kj is so bad because large parts of the vatican library was not
> available to its writers
What? This fetishizing of the Vatican Library is on the order of X-Files
paranoia. For those who are interested, the Vatican Librarian, Fr.
Leonard Boyle, O.P., has written a brief but fascinating history of the
Vatican Library. It is available online at:
http://www.task.gda.pl/expo/vatican.exhibit/exhibit/Intro.html#text
> Proof of no christ.
> It is very difficult to prove some thing did not exist.
> Do you have a singe document from his time that can be carbon dated ( to
> prove its not a forgery. ) that says he or his miricles existed,
> Just one.
7Q5 = Mark 6:52-53 (dated to the mid-1/c, with a terminus post quem non of
A.D. 65, based on paleographic analysis before the text was identified).
> By the way we can now prove things we couldn't a hundred years ago.
> Take Columbus. A hundred or so years ago a monk was excommunicated for
> saying Col wasn't Italian, that he was a spanish jew. His reason was COL
> did not talk like an Italian
> Now we know he was right. We can even tell what provence in spain he was
> from
> by his phraseology, and idiomology by the use of computers. We do this
> all the time, we tell where a person is from by his accent. We can even
> get a good idea of his profession by his use of personel pronouns
"Columbus began his career as an escapee from a clannish family and a
humble home. It is as certain as knowledge can be from so long ago that
the Cristobal Colon who sailed across the Atlantic in 1492 was the same
Cristoforo Colombo who was born in or near Genoa, to a weaver named
Domenico, probably a little over forty years before. The evidence
consists not only in Columbus's own frequent, apparently heartfelt
assertions of Genoese provenance, but also in a document of unimpreachable
authenticity, in which some of his Genoese kinsfolk declared their
intention of sending to Spain, after his rise to fame, to seek his
patronage."--Felipe Fernandez-Armesto, *Columbus* (Oxford U. Pr., 1991),
p. 1.
> When you say the new testiment. Which of the hundred or so versions are
> you talking about. The oldest complete Christian NT is the Sinaiticus and
> that dates from about 350 ad
> Its easy to say that this document comes from an earlier one but that is
> called hearsay and it doesn't hold up in court or in scientific circles.
I would wager that you have no idea what hearsay actually is. In any
event, those sorts of concerns do not apply here because there are
hundreds of fragments and citations in the Church fathers which pre-date
Codex Sinaiticus by centuries.
There is even some thought now, based on papyrological investigation, that
7Q5, P64, and P67, date from the 1/c. See C.P. Thiede & M. D'Ancona,
*Eyewitness to Jesus: Amazing New Manuscript Evidence About the Origin of
the Gospels* (1996).
> But you did have a conspriacy. It was called the catholic church. They
> destroyed thousands of books that would prove other than thier current
> belief.
> I believe Tishendorf found somthing like 14,800 changes to the codx
> sinaiticus in 1865. That seems like a conspiracy to me. Its called
> adherence to the doctrines of the faith. They used to excomunicate you or
> burn you at the stake for it.
Hmm. Perhaps you can cite some sources for your outrageous claims. One
can consult Nestle-Aland (26th ed.) and find many textual variations
between Codex Sinaiticus and the Textus Receptus, perhaps several
hundred--certainly NOT 14,800!
Pax.
WMK.
______________________________________________________________________________
William M. Klimon ("12") wkl...@umabnet.ab.umd.edu
University of Maryland School of Law
500 West Baltimore Street
Baltimore, MD 21201-1786