BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 May 06 - 10:55 PM

Very interesting quote from Mr Reade, there, flattop.

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Alba
Date: 21 May 06 - 10:53 PM

I agree 'The Veil of Isis' is a great Book AR282.
Jude

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: flattop
Date: 21 May 06 - 10:49 PM

He was a great writer. The Druid book is at:
http://www.sacred-texts.com/pag/motd/motd.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: GUEST,AR282
Date: 21 May 06 - 10:47 PM

Yep, he has one on the druids and if you haven't read it then you must do so. Meanwhile, I'll have to hunt this other title down.

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 May 06 - 10:44 PM

Flattop! Where the heck did you suddenly emerge from after all this time? How goes it?

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: flattop
Date: 21 May 06 - 10:36 PM

Didn't know he had one on the Druids. Read this one years ago, after reading a bit on it by Orwell. Images still linger in my feeble mind.

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: GUEST,AR282
Date: 21 May 06 - 10:31 PM

>>The the history of Jesus and the evolution of many religeous beliefs were covered nicely in Winwood Reade's outstanding book, The Martyrdom of Man, published in 1872.<<

I have his book on the Druids and it's one of the best things I have read on the subject.

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: flattop
Date: 21 May 06 - 10:30 PM

Sorry, the web address:

The Martyrdom of Man by Winwood Reade.
http://www.exclassics.com/martyrdom/mrtintro.htm

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: GUEST,AR282
Date: 21 May 06 - 10:29 PM

>>It is even thought by some that "Barrabas" may have had the full name of "Yeshua bar Abbas" or Jesus Barrabas -- a revolt by a person of that name was recorded by the Romans.<<

Maybe that was the real gospelic Jesus--a criminal. No wonder they cloaked him so much myth that we can't find the real man. After all Barabbas is Aramaic for "son of the father." Jesus Son of the Father. Sound familiar? Didn't Josephus make reference to a Jesus that led a band or "mariners and poor people" in Galilee who took to robbing people and vandalizing public buildings?

Funny how Christians can cite all these Jesus references in Josephus and conveniently forget to mention this one.

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 May 06 - 10:28 PM

Hunniford's pronouncement sounds like the sort of desperate statement that I've heard coming from the mouths of hard-charging evangelists who find themselves failing to save some soul they are hell-bent on saving. Or when they are confronted with the current broo-ha-ha over The Da Vinci Code. But to turn around and say that Jesus didn't exist (and I readily acknowledge that it is remotely—remotely—possible that he did not, sounds to me like just as desperate a statement from those who harbor an antipathy toward Christianity, or religion in general.

". . . full of sound and fury, signifying nothing."
               —William Shakespeare, who, we are pretty sure. did exist.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: flattop
Date: 21 May 06 - 10:24 PM

The the history of Jesus and the evolution of many religeous beliefs were covered nicely in Winwood Reade's outstanding book, The Martyrdom of Man, published in 1872. His book covers history in a passionate way that many later works missed. He seems to have understood the excitement and emotions of people and their beliefs as they battle through time. He also seemed to have access to historical material that has since disappeared from the mainstream of history. This scholarly work, which mentions Hull as well as Hell, is chocked full of human details from times when beliefs were a matter of life and death, long before they became catnip for web-pussies.

You can read the book on-line or download a zipped file. Three long paragraphs on the rise of Christianity in Ancient Rome will give you the flavour of Winwood Reade's writing:
___

So passed the Roman street-life day, and with the first hours of darkness the noise and the turmoil did not cease; for then the travelling carriages rattled towards the gates, and carts filled with dung-the only export of the city. The music of serenades rose softly in the air, and sounds of laughter from the tavern. The night watch made their rounds, their armour rattling as they passed. Lights were extinguished, householders put up their shutters, to which bells were fastened-for burglaries frequently occurred. And then for a time the city would be almost still. Dogs, hated by the Romans, prowled about sniffing for their food. Men or prey from the Pontine Marshes crept stealthily along the black side of the street signalling to one another with sharp whistles or hissing sounds. Sometimes torches would flash against the walls as a knot of young gallants reeled home from a debauch, breaking the noses of the street statues on their way. And at such an hour there were men and women who stole forth from their various houses, and with mantles covering their faces hastened to a lonely spot in the suburbs, and entered the mouth of a dark cave. They passed through long galleries, moist with damp and odorous of death-for coffins were ranged on either side in tiers one above the other. But soon sweet music sounded from the depths of the abyss; an open chamber came to view, and a tomb covered with flowers, laid out with a repast, encircled by men and women who were apparelled in white robes, and who sang a psalm of joy. It was in the catacombs of Rome, where the dead had been buried in the ancient times, that the Christians met to discourse on the progress of the faith; to recount the trials which they suffered in their homes; to confess to one another their sins and doubts, their carnal presumption, or their lack of faith; and also to relate their sweet visions of the night, the answers to their earnest prayers. They listened to the exhortations of their elders, and perhaps to a letter from one of the apostles. They then supped together as Jesus had supped with his disciples, and kissed one another when the love feast was concluded. At these meetings there was no distinction of rank; the high-born lady embraced the slave whom she had once scarcely regarded as a man. Humility and submission were the cardinal virtues of the early Christians; slavery had not been forbidden by the apostles because it was the doctrine of Jesus that those who were lowest in this world would be highest in the next, his theory of heaven being earth turned upside down. Slavery therefore was esteemed a state of grace, and some Christians appear to have rejected the freeman´s cap on religious grounds, for Paul exhorts such persons to become free if they can-advice which slaves do not usually require.

As time passed on, the belief of the first Christians that the end of the world was near at hand became fainter and gradually died away. It was then declared that God had favoured the earth with a respite of one thousand years. In the meantime the gospel or good tidings which the Christians announced was this. There was one God, the Creator of the world. He had long been angry with men because they were what he had made them. But he sent his only begotten son into a corner of Syria, and because his son had been murdered his wrath had been partly appeased. He would not torture to eternity all the souls that he had made; he would spare at least one in every million that were born. Peace unto earth and goodwill unto men if they would act in a certain manner; if not, fire and brimstone and the noisome pit. He was the emperor of heaven, the tyrant of the skies; the pagan gods were rebels, with whom he was at war, although he was all-powerful, and whom he allowed to seduce the souls of men although he was all-merciful. Those who joined the army of the cross might entertain some hopes of being saved; those who followed the faith of their fathers would follow their fathers to hell-fire. This creed with the early Christians was not a matter of half-belief and metaphysical debate, as it is at the present day, when Catholics and Protestants discuss hell-fire with courtesy and comfort over filberts and port wine. To those credulous and imaginative minds God was a live king, hell a place in which real bodies were burnt with real flames, which was filled with the sickening stench of roasted flesh, which resounded with agonising shrieks. They saw their fathers and mothers, their sisters and their dearest friends, hurrying onward to that fearful pit unconscious of danger, laughing and singing, lured on by the fiends whom they called the gods. They felt as we should feel were we to see a blind man walking towards a river bank. Who would have the heart to turn aside and say it was the business of the police to interfere? But what was death, a mere momentary pain, compared with tortures that would have no end? Who that could hope to save a soul by tears and supplications would remain quiescent as men do now, shrugging their shoulders and saying that it is not good taste to argue on religion, and that conversion is the office of the clergy? The Christians of that period felt more and did more than those of the present day, not because they were better men but because they believed more; and they believed more because they knew less. Doubt is the offspring of knowledge: the savage never doubts at all.

In that age the Christians believed much, and their lives were rendered beautiful by sympathy and love. The dark, deep river did not exist-it was only a fancy of the brain: yet the impulse was not less real. The heart-throb, the imploring cry, the swift leap, the trembling hand out-reached to save; the transport of delight, the ecstasy of tears, the sweet, calm joy that a man had been wrested from the jaws of death-are these less beautiful, are these less real, because it afterwards appeared that the man had been in no danger after all?

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: GUEST,AR282
Date: 21 May 06 - 10:23 PM

>>"One who shall help" is not the same as "messiah".<<

Yes, well, we were discussing the meaning of the word Jesus not the meaning of the word messiah. If you're going to waste my time like this, please stop. We were never discussing the meaning of messiah and you know it. You're the one who asked me to cite a source for Jesus meaning savior and I have done that. Now if you have nothing else, I'd say we're through.

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Rapparee
Date: 21 May 06 - 10:18 PM

Actually, Don, "Yeshua" was a fairly common name in Palestine in the 1st Century or so CE. Jesus ben Sirach lived as early as 200 BCE; many ossiaries and other "name" records have been found with the name on them. It is even thought by some that "Barrabas" may have had the full name of "Yeshua bar Abbas" or Jesus Barrabas -- a revolt by a person of that name was recorded by the Romans.

As for the "Gospels" -- reputable scholars list Matthew, Luke, Thomas, John, and the Egerton Gospel as derivative from M, Mark, Q, L, Thomas (an earlier version from which the later Thomas was derived), Signs, and an earlier Egerton. Another early writing appropriate to study is called the Didache.

Then there are the Dag Hammani manuscripts, the Gospel of Magdala, the Gospel of Mary, the Gospel of Peter, the Gospel of James...not to mention the "Dead Sea Scrolls."

Albert Schweitzer wrote "The Quest for the Historical Jesus" nearly a century ago. It's hard going, but quite good scholarship.

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: GUEST,AR282
Date: 21 May 06 - 10:17 PM

>>The earlier (Arabian) version in teh same reference omits the stuff mentioned in RED capitals...<<

One more time: what historian or commentator prior to Eusebius mention this passage?

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 21 May 06 - 10:03 PM

"On today's BBC TV programme "The Heaven and Earth Show", presenter Gloria Hunniford stated that there is more historical evidence to back up the existence of Jesus than there is for the existence of Julius Caesar"

That is the typical sort of statement made by many people of 'Faith' - if you have 'Faith' - who needs 'Facts' anyway. And the "Pauline-Constanian-Conspiracy" generated from of 'Christianity' has always been obsessed with blind obedience and lack of critical thinking by its followers, let alone anybody else - Control Freaks All! For support of this - see the canonical passages that mention that only those with the unquestioning minds of naive children can have 'Faith'!!!

It's In The Book!

Sorry... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 May 06 - 09:52 PM

AR 282, I didn't call you Dick Cheney, I said your were pulling a Dick Cheney. That's questioning your reasoning, not attacking you personally. Unless, of course, you regard someone's questioning your reasoning as an ad hominem attack. Please don't tell me about logical fallacies. Recognizing them is one of my areas of expertise.

And please don't try to pick a fight when there isn't one. Now, back to our regular broadcast:   

I have a tendency to think that Yeshua or Joshua was, probably not as common as the name "Mohammed" is currently in the Middle East, but certainly common. There were a whole heap of Joshuas running around back then, including the one who fit the battle of Jericho. Probably just about every Jewish mother would have liked it if her son grew up the be the savior of his people.

Everyone's name has some kind of meaning. For example, my first name is Donald. Celtic, it means meaning "proud chief, world leader." My middle name is Richard, French, German, or Old English, and it means "powerful ruler."

With a pair of names like that, how come everybody bosses me around!??

I think that questioning the actual existence of Jesus on the basis that the name means "savior" is just a bit weak.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 21 May 06 - 09:50 PM

AR282 said:

"Jesus Christ, or more properly Jesus the Christ, Jesus, which is the given name of our Lord, was the Greek form of the Hebrew Joshua, meaning savior."--J. G. Ferguson KJV, 1965, p.21 of the "Scriptural Directory."

"'Jesus' is a rendition of the original Yeshua both in the Hebrew temple language or in Aramaic, the common language of daily life in first century Palestine. It means 'one who shall help, save, or deliver' God's people."--James C. Winston KJV, 1993, p. 1377.

"One who shall help" is not the same as "messiah". I assume that Winston would have said "Messiach" if that's what he meant. That terms was around when the King James Version was written, and also in 1993, I believe.



And AR282 went on: After this, if you try to pull this on me, I will simply reply, "What is your evidence to the contrary?"

I didn't say that it was not so; I merely said it was news to me, and inquired as to a source.   I didn't and don't claim that I HAVE evidence to the contrary, but merely that I didn't know that to be the case. I said (and I quote), "That's news to me!" And it was. I also implied, I suppose, that I had doubts about the accuracy of that attribution, which I think I am allowed to do even in the absence of proof.

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 21 May 06 - 09:30 PM

And if "Jesus" means "savior", then so does Isaiah, which is another form of the same name.


On another subject,
Peace gave us a link to an essay about the writings of various ancient writers, and the article says, at one point, discussing Pliny the Younger:

Some eighty years after Calvary, somebody was worshiping a Christ (Hebrew equivalent for Messiah)!

That parenthetical comment is entirely different from the etymology I've always understood.

As I understand from what I was taught in confirmation class 62 years ago, "Christ" is not Hebrew, or Aramaic; it's Greek, from "christos", and doesn't mean "messiah" but "anointed one".

The parenthetical in the quote I suspect is not from Pliny the Younger, as it seems to imply, but the insertion (probably the editorial guess or self-serving argument) of an uninformed present-day commentator.

Can anyone show any authoritative etymological source that "Christ" is "Jewish for "messiah"?

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 21 May 06 - 09:29 PM

"Show me how it was determined that the upper case of the Josephus quote was added to the lower case words already supposedly there. "

The earlier (Arabian) version in teh same reference omits the stuff mentioned in RED capitals...

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: GUEST,AR282
Date: 21 May 06 - 09:26 PM

>>Hello, Guest. Could you please use the word mouthy as your name so that people don't get us mixed up?<<

Apparently your moniker was correctly chosen.

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: GUEST
Date: 21 May 06 - 09:24 PM

>>That's not an ad hominem attack, GUEST. I'm calling the logic of the statement into question, and that's fair game.<<

Calling me Dick Cheney in the middle of an argument about the historicity of Jesus is not an ad hominem attack. Right.

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: GUEST,AR282
Date: 21 May 06 - 09:23 PM

Sorry, all the last few GUEST posts were by me in case you didn't know.

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: GUEST
Date: 21 May 06 - 09:22 PM

>>AR282 told us, in part:

The name "Jesus" means "savior."

That's news to me. What's your citation for that etymology?<<

I'm only going to do your homework for you this once:

"Jesus Christ, or more properly Jesus the Christ, Jesus, which is the given name of our Lord, was the Greek form of the Hebrew Joshua, meaning savior."--J. G. Ferguson KJV, 1965, p.21 of the "Scriptural Directory."

"'Jesus' is a rendition of the original Yeshua both in the Hebrew temple language or in Aramaic, the common language of daily life in first century Palestine. It means 'one who shall help, save, or deliver' God's people."--James C. Winston KJV, 1993, p. 1377.

After this, if you try to pull this on me, I will simply reply, "What is your evidence to the contrary?"

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 May 06 - 09:21 PM

That's not an ad hominem attack, GUEST. I'm calling the logic of the statement into question, and that's fair game.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 May 06 - 09:09 PM

The most common incorrect assumption many people make when they argue about something like what's in this thread is this one:

They assume the other people are idiots, and must believe in something totally stupid.

They are almost always 100% wrong about that...regardless of which side of the debate they choose to be on.

That kind of superficial, disrespectful attitude toward other people's intelligence is mostly what turns discussions around here into a sorry joke, rather than into something worth pursuing.

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: GUEST,AR282
Date: 21 May 06 - 09:08 PM

>>What really solid evidence is there that anyone you haven't met "in the flesh" exists or existed? And what non-anecdotal evidence can you offer to prove even those you have met in the flesh exist(ed)? I certainly have no reason to believe "Guest AR282" exists in anything but name<<

Right. My posts type and post themselves.

>>and I have slightly stronger reason to believe Jesus was the Messiah of God foretold by prophets than to believe that "Guest AR282" read the source on Josephus before copypasting it. (Though my evidence for the former is private and that against the latter speculative.)<<

Appealing to the upper case/lower case issue isn't going to help you. I said it once already but I'll repeat:

Show me how it was determined that the upper case of the Josephus quote was added to the lower case words already supposedly there. Name one single historian or commentator prior to Eusebius who quotes any part of that passage--even one single sentnce or even a partial sentence. Nothing. There is nothing to help you. Ergo, until you can answer my charge, you are blowing smoke and deluding only yourselves. Of course, if you're right, show me your evidence. You do have evidence, right?

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 21 May 06 - 09:07 PM

AR282 told us, in part:

The name "Jesus" means "savior."

That's news to me. What's your citation for that etymology?

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 May 06 - 09:05 PM

Why would you assume that people who think Jesus really existed are necessarily trying to convince you that he "is the son of god and that I am supposed to worship him" or anything like that?

Sounds like setting up the old straw man argument to me...

I bet you that a whole lot of people who believe that Jesus really existed do not adhere to those conditions in the least. I know some do...but others don'ts. I know I don't. Assuming that everyone who believes he was a real physical, historical man wants to "shove him down" your throat is an incorrect assumption, I assure you.

I no more require that you worship Jesus than I would require that you worship Shakespeare, Robin Hood, Attila the Hun, Buddha, Krishna, Jack the Ripper, or a variety of other people who may or may not have existed in what the way they are reputed to have existed.

You assume that your presumed "opponents" on this thread are all, and must all be Christian religous fanatics (in your view). That assumption is your error.

I see Jesus as an inspired man who very likely existed and went around preaching in Palestine, and had a big effect on a number of people. I don't see him as someone who is the "only Son of God" or someone whom you are obliged to worship. If you don't want to worship anyone, no sweat! I don't care. ;-D

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: GUEST,PMS
Date: 21 May 06 - 09:02 PM

Hello, Guest. Could you please use the word mouthy as your name so that people don't get us mixed up?

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: GUEST
Date: 21 May 06 - 08:56 PM

>>What you're objecting to here is not some historical figure who may or may not have existed, but to a bunch of people who exist NOW.<<

To both actually. If you can prove Jesus is the son of god and that I am supposed to worship him, I will. But you can't even get that far because you can't prove he existed. Ergo, I don't even accept that much until you prove it.

Now you're asking me about Socrates, well, guess what? I don't care about Socrates and don't know much about the man. But if you were trying to shove him down my throat, then I might care.

>>You're pulling a Dick Cheney. Be sure of your target before you pull the trigger.<<

Ad hominem attack. Invalid me boy. Either disprove my evidence or admit you been owned, baby.

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Peace
Date: 21 May 06 - 08:53 PM

Pilate's letters to Seneca.

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 May 06 - 08:47 PM

Hmmmm. And just how would a person go about giving their money to Jesus????? ;-D The real Jesus himself, I mean. Not easily done. I don't think he would want it anyway. He doesn't appear to have gone around soliciting money from people when he was doing his 3 years work in Palestine...

Odd how hungry some of his so-called followers are for the folding stuff nowadays! But then, they're no different from many who don't believe in that respect, are they? It's money, money, money all the way around, regardless whether people are pushing organized religion or some other "ism" they are busy promoting.

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 21 May 06 - 08:33 PM

">>Tell me: other than a few writings, what evidence is there that Socrates existed?<<

I don't know but when people start calling him the son of god and telling me I must worship him and give him my money and vote for republican candidates because its what he wants me to do, I'll start looking into his life as well. "

LOL - I'm going to try to remember that quote... :-)

"There is more coming out of Israel today than ever before -- and I'm talking about solid historical objects (including bodies)."

You think we might find his... wait on a minute there...

One, Two, OK, both legs are stll there...

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 May 06 - 08:28 PM

Yes, "Christ" is a title of spiritual honour, not the man's name. It's like calling someone an Avatar or a Buddha or a Saviour or a Messiah or any number of other such words. His actual name was most likely Yeshua Ben-Joseph, in the language of the time. Names tend to change a lot as they move from one language and culture to another. It's "Jesus" in Spanish, for instance, but they pronounce it "Hay-soos" (if you're English-speaking). It's "Jesu" in a number of languages, and that's usually pronounced "Yay-soo" in English terms.

Yeshua would have been "yesh-oo-ah" in English terms.

And all those would be just approximations of the name, in all probability.

The only way to know for sure is go back there if you can figure out how to do time travel. If not, you are engaging in speculation, guesswork (educated or otherwise) and the repetitive playing out of your own emotional prejudices on the issue (for or against).

That's why most of these debates here about it are mainly hot air, and yield a lot more heat than light.

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 May 06 - 08:26 PM

And in that same ballpark, I used to have an upstairs neighbor who talked religion—a lot!! After one of his many diatribes, it occurred to me that he seemed to think that "Almighty" is God's first name. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Rapparee
Date: 21 May 06 - 08:14 PM

If Yeshua of Nazareth died in 33 (and the date is flexible) then the Gospel of Mark, the earliest, was written about 37 years later.

Personally, I'd suggest a wait and see attitude. There is more coming out of Israel today than ever before -- and I'm talking about solid historical objects (including bodies). One new book (which I'm currently reading) is The Jesus Dynasty, in which the OT concept of the Messiah is pointed out to be not one person, but two: a descendant of the Levi priesthood and a descendant of the Davidic line; these descriptions fit the purported genealogy of John the Baptizer and Yeshua of Nazareth.

By the way, the term "Christ" is not and never has been the man's last name. It comes from the Greek, means "The Anointed One" and shares the same root as "chrism" and "charisma".

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: SINSULL
Date: 21 May 06 - 08:03 PM

GUEST - I was responding to your claim that no one of Christ's generation or immediately after it, mentions his existence. You brought up Tacitus. I gave you a quote from Tacitus disproving your claim.

Tacitus does not say where his info came from. Can't help you there.

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 May 06 - 06:35 PM

I'd guess that a great deal of real history was not as we believe it to be. Probably a good 50% of it. Everything is interpreted through the sujbective eyes and the blind spots and prejudices of whoever writes it down, and of those who repeat it in the generations after that.

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Peace
Date: 21 May 06 - 06:26 PM

Even the suggestion that history may not be as we believe sure can bring out the vitriolic side of some folks.

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Haruo
Date: 21 May 06 - 06:22 PM

Incidentally and only FWIW I find your (Peace's) "excellent essay" leaves much to be desired; it does, however, point out when Tacitus lived, which makes it clear that Tacitus did not write what was attributed to him earlier at the time alleged (i.e. he wrote after the turn of the century, not in the mid-60s). He was an historian, not a journalist.

Haruo

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Peace
Date: 21 May 06 - 06:10 PM

LOL

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Haruo
Date: 21 May 06 - 06:10 PM

No, but he has been prophesied.

Haruo

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Peace
Date: 21 May 06 - 06:04 PM

I have to ask: Has anyone here ever actually met William Shakespeare?

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Haruo
Date: 21 May 06 - 06:03 PM

What really solid evidence is there that anyone you haven't met "in the flesh" exists or existed? And what non-anecdotal evidence can you offer to prove even those you have met in the flesh exist(ed)? I certainly have no reason to believe "Guest AR282" exists in anything but name, and I have slightly stronger reason to believe Jesus was the Messiah of God foretold by prophets than to believe that "Guest AR282" read the source on Josephus before copypasting it. (Though my evidence for the former is private and that against the latter speculative.)

Obviously what one considers "historical evidence" is pertinent here; I would recommend the arguments in A Marginal Jew and Saint Saul to those seriously interested in the issues involved. Both authors are serious historians; the former is more committed to Christian tradition than the latter, but both argue as historians rather than as apologists. Personally, although I am a Christian believer, I find Akenson more persuasive than Meier.

Haruo

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 May 06 - 05:46 PM

"What you're objecting to here is not some historical figure who may or may not have existed, but to a bunch of people who exist NOW."

Oh, yeah! LOL! Well said, Don! That oughta be carved in gold and glued to a bunch of people's foreheads for a month or two till they finally "get it", and find something else to bitch about endlessly instead. It's not like there aren't a few other things like that to choose from... ;-D

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 May 06 - 05:31 PM

(Hells Bells! I never thought I'd be arguing on this side of the fence!)

"I don't know but when people start calling him the son of god and telling me I must worship him and give him my money and vote for republican candidates because its what he wants me to do, I'll start looking into his life as well."

So don't!

What you're objecting to here is not some historical figure who may or may not have existed, but to a bunch of people who exist NOW. You're pulling a Dick Cheney. Be sure of your target before you pull the trigger.

Besides, if you (and the bleedin' Republicans!) knew anything at all about what this alleged person referred to as Jesus Christ is supposed to have taught (try Matthew 25:35-40 HERE as a sample), you'd know that the Republicans are the last outfit Jesus would want you to vote for.

Don Firth

(Are you even going to bother to look at the link? I didn't think so.)

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Peace
Date: 21 May 06 - 04:33 PM

Excellent essay here.

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Don Firth
Date: 21 May 06 - 04:24 PM

"There's nothing scrambled about my facts. If there was, you'd quote something to prove it. Until you can do so, my facts stand."

AR282, I don't have the time to sit here and write a treatise for your enlightenment and edification. I've given you a source—the aforementioned book by Charles Freeman—for all the facts you need to unscramble your scrambled history. That's quote enough. And your "facts" are not facts at all, they're the results of your own prejudgments.

Get the bloody book and read it.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Peace
Date: 21 May 06 - 04:14 PM

Hemingway also blew his brains out.

Subject: RE: BS: Julius Caesar/Jesus - fact or fiction?
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 21 May 06 - 04:13 PM

I think if you're looking for proof, in a way, you've missed the point. the whole point of reason is to point you in the opposite direction of faith.

faith = a suspension of the scepticism and critical faculty that stands us in good stead in every other aspect of life.

rather in the same way the Hemingway said about courage in battle, being a suspension of our powers of imagination.

whether you suspend these great powers of reasoning and scepticism is very much up to you. But surely the whole business of doubting Thomas is a fair indication of what Jesus expected of us.

Finally (for this is heavy stuff for a bear of very little brain) Hemingway also said that there has never was an army that didn't run, fled the field of battle at some point.

Courage and faith, they aren't given to us all the time. Otherwise they wouldn't be a miracle.