Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Regarding Tacitus,Richard Carrier has many videos and books arguing against Jesus ever existing. Here is one
What are you going to post next some retarded videos that man never stepped on the moon?
Jesus was a person.. now to say he was the son of God?
I believe it
And you have your beliefs ...
Well I certainly didn't post the video so you could look at it with a thoughtful and critical approach. I posted it so you could dismiss it without conviction. Hang on to your world. Don't let anyone break it down.
Tacitus had no axe to grind, could care less about whether Jesus was the son of God, and was living a mere twenty years after Jesus died. He had access to people who were in the area when Jesus walked the Earth, and was primarily concerned with the Christians because they were colossal pains in the ass. Carrier on the other hand, is according to his wiki page, "is an American historian, atheist activist, author, public speaker and blogger."
So he suffers from what is known as confirmation bias. Like I said before, who to give more credence too, someone who had nothing to gain by writing about the man, or someone who has a philosophical, and monetary reason to question his existence, who ignores clear, non biblical historical reference from multiple sources and removed by a few years from the actual events.
Many who accept the authenticity of this section of the "Annals" believe that the sentence which declares that Christ was punished in the reign of Pontius Pilate, and which I have italicized, is an interpolation
- It is not quoted by the Christian fathers.
- Tertullian was familiar with the writings of Tacitus, and his arguments demanded the citation of this evidence had it existed.
- Clement of Alexandria, at the beginning of the third century, made a compilation of all the recognitions of Christ and Christianity that had been made by Pagan writers up to his time. The writings of Tacitus furnished no recognition of them.
- Origen, in his controversy with Celsus, would undoubtedly have used it had it existed.
- The ecclesiastical historian Eusebius, in the fourth century, cites all the evidences of Christianity obtainable from Jewish and Pagan sources, but makes no mention of Tacitus.
- It is not quoted by any Christian writer prior to the fifteenth century.
- At this time but one copy of the Annals existed and this copy, it is claimed, was made in the eighth century -- 600 years after the time of Tacitus.
- As this single copy was in the possession of a Christian the insertion of a forgery was easy.
- Its severe criticisms of Christianity do not necessarily disprove its Christian origin. No ancient witness was more desirable than Tacitus, but his introduction at so late a period would make rejection certain unless Christian forgery could be made to appear improbable.
- It is admitted by Christian writers that the works of Tacitus have not been preserved with any considerable degree of fidelity. In the writings ascribed to him are believed to be some of the writings of Quintilian.
- The blood-curdling story about the frightful orgies of Nero reads like some Christian romance of the dark ages, and not like Tacitus.
- In fact, this story, in nearly the same words, omitting the reference to Christ, is to be found in the writings of Sulpicius Severus, a Christian of the fifth century.
- Suetonius, while mercilessly condemning the reign of Nero, says that in his public entertainments he took particular care that no human lives should be sacrificed, "not even those of condemned criminals."
- At the time that the conflagration occurred, Tacitus himself declares that Nero was not in Rome, but at Antium.
The Christ : a critical review and analysis of the evidences of His existence : Remsburg, John E. (John Eleazer), 1846-1919 : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive
Richard Carrier has many videos and books arguing against Jesus ever existing. Here is one
What are you going to post next some retarded videos that man never stepped on the moon?
Jesus was a person.. now to say he was the son of God?
I believe it
And you have your beliefs ...
Well I certainly didn't post the video so you could look at it with a thoughtful and critical approach. I posted it so you could dismiss it without conviction. Hang on to your world. Don't let anyone break it down.
Tacitus had no axe to grind, could care less about whether Jesus was the son of God, and was living a mere twenty years after Jesus died. He had access to people who were in the area when Jesus walked the Earth, and was primarily concerned with the Christians because they were colossal pains in the ass. Carrier on the other hand, is according to his wiki page, "is an American historian, atheist activist, author, public speaker and blogger."
So he suffers from what is known as confirmation bias. Like I said before, who to give more credence too, someone who had nothing to gain by writing about the man, or someone who has a philosophical, and monetary reason to question his existence, who ignores clear, non biblical historical reference from multiple sources and removed by a few years from the actual events.
is an American historian, atheist activist, author, public speaker and blogger."
Translation~ another one of these
Who say god doesn't exist but thinks about god 24/7
What's the point with people like this?
They are miserable in their life's so they want other people to be miserable with them?
I don't get it..
carrier is just another in a long line of militant atheists trying to impose his will on others. I have no idea if Jesus was the Son of God, i do know that those who believe in it are none of my business. I do read a hell of a lot of history, bot contemporary and modern material, and Christ was written about very shortly after his death by non biblical sources. This is well known. The efforts by these people to re write history is a direct assault on history. These people are not historians, they are vandals, they are only interested in destruction, not the furtherance of knowledge.
Richard Carrier has many videos and books arguing against Jesus ever existing. Here is one
What are you going to post next some retarded videos that man never stepped on the moon?
Jesus was a person.. now to say he was the son of God?
I believe it
And you have your beliefs ...
Well I certainly didn't post the video so you could look at it with a thoughtful and critical approach. I posted it so you could dismiss it without conviction. Hang on to your world. Don't let anyone break it down.
Tacitus had no axe to grind, could care less about whether Jesus was the son of God, and was living a mere twenty years after Jesus died. He had access to people who were in the area when Jesus walked the Earth, and was primarily concerned with the Christians because they were colossal pains in the ass. Carrier on the other hand, is according to his wiki page, "is an American historian, atheist activist, author, public speaker and blogger."
So he suffers from what is known as confirmation bias. Like I said before, who to give more credence too, someone who had nothing to gain by writing about the man, or someone who has a philosophical, and monetary reason to question his existence, who ignores clear, non biblical historical reference from multiple sources and removed by a few years from the actual events.
is an American historian, atheist activist, author, public speaker and blogger."
Translation~ another one of these
Who say god doesn't exist but thinks about god 24/7
What's the point with people like this?
They are miserable in their life's so they want other people to be miserable with them?
I don't get it..
carrier is just another in a long line of militant atheists trying to impose his will on others. I have no idea if Jesus was the Son of God, i do know that those who believe in it are none of my business. I do read a hell of a lot of history, bot contemporary and modern material, and Christ was written about very shortly after his death by non biblical sources. This is well known. The efforts by these people to re write history is a direct assault on history. These people are not historians, they are vandals, they are only interested in destruction, not the furtherance of knowledge.
Easy to say, hard to prove. At least I have Occam's Razor on my side.You believe, wrong.I believe he was a Jewish zealot seeking the end of Roman rule in the land God gave to the Israelites
Familiarity breeds contempt.Ok I have a question for you can you name me one atheist in the West who attacks the Quran as much as the Bible?
Why don't they?
To me it's like liberals always attacking fox and not attacking the real one Glen becks channel the blaze
Well I certainly didn't post the video so you could look at it with a thoughtful and critical approach. I posted it so you could dismiss it without conviction. Hang on to your world. Don't let anyone break it down.What are you going to post next some retarded videos that man never stepped on the moon?
Jesus was a person.. now to say he was the son of God?
I believe it
And you have your beliefs ...
Tacitus had no axe to grind, could care less about whether Jesus was the son of God, and was living a mere twenty years after Jesus died. He had access to people who were in the area when Jesus walked the Earth, and was primarily concerned with the Christians because they were colossal pains in the ass. Carrier on the other hand, is according to his wiki page, "is an American historian, atheist activist, author, public speaker and blogger."
So he suffers from what is known as confirmation bias. Like I said before, who to give more credence too, someone who had nothing to gain by writing about the man, or someone who has a philosophical, and monetary reason to question his existence, who ignores clear, non biblical historical reference from multiple sources and removed by a few years from the actual events.
is an American historian, atheist activist, author, public speaker and blogger."
Translation~ another one of these
Who say god doesn't exist but thinks about god 24/7
What's the point with people like this?
They are miserable in their life's so they want other people to be miserable with them?
I don't get it..
carrier is just another in a long line of militant atheists trying to impose his will on others. I have no idea if Jesus was the Son of God, i do know that those who believe in it are none of my business. I do read a hell of a lot of history, bot contemporary and modern material, and Christ was written about very shortly after his death by non biblical sources. This is well known. The efforts by these people to re write history is a direct assault on history. These people are not historians, they are vandals, they are only interested in destruction, not the furtherance of knowledge.
Vandals ?
Exactly
Your excuses did not change the facts they, verified what I've said all along.You now are denying that you talked about 100bc Yeshu and 45 ad Theudas the only Pilate era christ?
Calling someone stupid for showing you the historical relevance of what you said is calling yourself that name, because you said but worse did not understand what you yourself were proving and admitting.
Stop the ad hominem responses and be honest with yourself.
You seem to think that information traveled at the speed of radio back then. You seem to ignore the fact that 99% of the population was illiterate, you seem to ignore the fact that THOUSANDS of manuscripts have been lost over the intervening two thousand years. You seem bent on ignoring the fact that Tacitus, one of the worlds best historians, speaks of Christ in detail, and he was a mere thirty odd years after the fact, in other words, for your views to support themselves, you must contort yourself into a pretzel of logic.
Which is asinine.
I was joking but in a way still requiring backing of the outlandish numerical claim and logic behind that mattering sinceI remember posting a link to them and you saying they were unreliable or some such thing.And you couldn't post one.There are more than 24,000 written manuscripts that document His ministry.
But I really shouldn't have to post them, now should I? Jesus did exist and Jesus was crucified.
I'm not the one who needs to invalidate anything.I was joking but in a way still requiring backing of the outlandish numerical claim and logic behind that mattering sinceI remember posting a link to them and you saying they were unreliable or some such thing.And you couldn't post one.There are more than 24,000 written manuscripts that document His ministry.
But I really shouldn't have to post them, now should I? Jesus did exist and Jesus was crucified.
your reasoning just validated Krishna who can claim older and more vast texts.
So does this mean you will cut your hair, leave a poney tail, put on a bed sheet toga and pass flowers around the airport while George Harrison plays in the background?
You do agree though that there has only been one revealed religion, right?I was joking but in a way still requiring backing of the outlandish numerical claim and logic behind that mattering sinceI remember posting a link to them and you saying they were unreliable or some such thing.And you couldn't post one.There are more than 24,000 written manuscripts that document His ministry.
But I really shouldn't have to post them, now should I? Jesus did exist and Jesus was crucified.
your reasoning just validated Krishna who can claim older and more vast texts.
So does this mean you will cut your hair, leave a poney tail, put on a bed sheet toga and pass flowers around the airport while George Harrison plays in the background?
That's some agnostic worldview you have there, amigo.
He did ask "who do you say I am" quite a bit.Most historians would say that Jesus existed.
So the question is, who was he?
Interestingly, in the gospels we see Jesus asking his own disciples who he was. It was Peter who said that he was the Son of God. Jesus then turned to him and said that the Father had revealed this to him. Inexplicably, he turned to the other disciples and ordered them not to tell anyone because his time to go to the cross had not yet come.
In a way, we are all still in the same boat. Who do you say Jesus was? Will the Father choose to reveal him to you?
Agnosticism doesnt refer to a specific religion's specific prophets or stories, amigo.That's some agnostic worldview you have there, amigo.
Actually Occam Razor would predict that the simplest explanation for the emergence of intelligence is that it proceeded from intelligence.Easy to say, hard to prove. At least I have Occam's Razor on my side.You believe, wrong.I believe he was a Jewish zealot seeking the end of Roman rule in the land God gave to the Israelites
I understand that you think you are an agnostic who only argues against the existence of a Creator.Agnosticism doesnt refer to a specific religion's specific prophets or stories, amigo.That's some agnostic worldview you have there, amigo.
Im agnostic as to how existence came to be.
Im "anti" the man made religions on account of their utter fucking ridiculousness.
Do you understand the difference? I can give analogies if thats unclear.
No, you are wrong.I understand that you think you are an agnostic who only argues against the existence of a Creator.Agnosticism doesnt refer to a specific religion's specific prophets or stories, amigo.That's some agnostic worldview you have there, amigo.
Im agnostic as to how existence came to be.
Im "anti" the man made religions on account of their utter fucking ridiculousness.
Do you understand the difference? I can give analogies if thats unclear.
An agnostic would argue both sides of the coin or not at all.
Your understanding of religion is biased and flawed. You blame religion for all the bad and give it no credit for the good. By any objective measure, religion has been a force for good.
Dude, you really should question yourself. You don't act like an agnostic. You act like an atheist. A militant one at that.No, you are wrong.I understand that you think you are an agnostic who only argues against the existence of a Creator.Agnosticism doesnt refer to a specific religion's specific prophets or stories, amigo.That's some agnostic worldview you have there, amigo.
Im agnostic as to how existence came to be.
Im "anti" the man made religions on account of their utter fucking ridiculousness.
Do you understand the difference? I can give analogies if thats unclear.
An agnostic would argue both sides of the coin or not at all.
Your understanding of religion is biased and flawed. You blame religion for all the bad and give it no credit for the good. By any objective measure, religion has been a force for good.
An agnostic analyzes the evidence presented.
Theres nothing Id call evidence thats been presented and withstood rational scrutiny ~
Also, you dont know what I blame religion for and dont, you pulled that out of your ass because its what you need to believe.
I dont debate you on these topics anymore, because you are irrational in almost every sentence, and you dont understand fact vs. assertion, which is ultimately your fatal flaw in your own research and arguments.
