r

Pliny the Younger (62-114 A.D.) wrte letters to Tarjan in 112 A.D. and
these are sometimes used to prove Jesus's exsistance. In a letter to
the Emperor Tarjan in 112 A.D. asking for instructions about how to deal
with the Christians in the area of the Roman Empire that had been
goverened, he describes the then current ceremonies and practices.

Problems: No one debates the fact that Christians worshipped back
then and that they had elaborate ceremonies and such so
it is useless in discussing the historicity of Jesus
because it does not talk of his EXSISTANCE. This letter
cannot be used to prove Jesus's Exsistance.

Thallus works are lost but Julius Africanus in the 3rd century quotes
Thallus's works and in his works Jesus's death is accompanied by an
Earthquake and an unusual darkness that Thallus, according to Africanus, wrongly attributes to an eclipse of the sun. However, we have no clear
idea when Thallus wrote his history or how accurate Africanus's account
is.

Problems: No indication on this man Thallus other than he wrote as
late as the 2nd century. His works could EASILY have
been copied by others. Scholars widely accept this as
useless data when concerning Jesus's Historicity.

Flavius Josephus who wrote "The Antiquites of the Jews" wrote a passage
that is by far the most quoted to PROVE that Jesus actually exsisted.
It talkes of Jesus as such:

"Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to
call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works - a teacher of such
men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many
of the Jews and many of the gentiles. He was the Christ; and when
Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned
him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him,
for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine
prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things
concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not
extinct at this day."

Problems: This passage is almost entirely accepted as a forgery
because of several things. First of all, Josephus was a
Jew and he would have NEVER referred to this man as the
"Christ". Next is that when this passage is taken IN
CONTEXT with the chapter it does not fit. It looks
perfectly like an insert. And lastly, Josephus would not
have talked about Jesus in such a way because orthodox
Jews (which he was) would not believe what he wrote and
neither would he.

The Talmund which was written primarily in the 1st to 2nd centuries A.D.
is also another source which is quoted to prove that Jesus exsisted.
The Talmund mentions a man named "Yeshu the Nazerene" who practiced
Magic and commited heresy in the reigh of Alexander Jannaeus. Some of
his 'disciples' that are listed with him are also party correlary with
the disciples of Jesus.

Problems: Yeshu the Nazerene lived during the reign of Alexander
Jannaeus who lived during 104-78 B.C. There is no way
this could have been Jesus that is talked of in the
bible.

The Bible is another source that is quoted to prove that Jesus exsisted
for it has a few details of dates and times and possibly can be used as
a historical source.

Problems: The 4 accounts of Jesus's life are so framentary and
in-correct that they cannot possible have any useful
(** Cont **)

(R)eply, (E)mail reply, (F)orum-Op, (T)hread, (P)revious, or (N)ext? .... 1200 N81N ........................ . ... ...-.... 1200 N81N ........................ . ... ...-.... 1200 N81N ........................ . ... ...-.... 1200 N81N ........................ . ... ...-.... 1200 N81N ................

Beth,
http://ricksbbs.synchro.net:8080
---
þ Synchronet þ Rick's BBS telnet://ricksbbs.synchro.net:23