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.
Alexander the great: More detailed accounts were written by historians, such as Arrian and Plutarch, centuries after his death, based on earlier sources that are now lost. Physical records include coins minted during his reign and archaeological evidence from his campaigns.
No, it is also a historical book. As the video explains, these are real people talking about real events in history.I have no doubt that there was a Jewish, apocalyptic preacher from Nazareth who had a small following, ran afoul of Roman authority and was crucified. Other than that, I'm very skeptical of anything else in the NT since it is not a history book, it is a theological work.
Yes, there are certainly real places, people, and events in the Bible but that is not the focus of the book and when the two conflict, the theology takes precedent. The result is that there are many events in the Bible that never actually happened but support the theology of the authors.No, it is also a historical book. As the video explains, these are real people talking about real events in history.
The only other example I know about would be the Iliad and the search for Troy.In fact, the Bible is the only religious text that I know of in which a scientific discipline has been created from, namely, Biblical Archeology.
Are you pointing out that belief in God took precedent?Yes, there are certainly real places, people, and events in the Bible but that is not the focus of the book and when the two conflict, the theology takes precedent.
Over historical veracity? Yes.Are you pointing out that belief in God took precedent?
Jews lived all over the Middle East so finding them in Egypt is hardly surprising. What is surprising is the total lack of evidence of an influx of people to Palestine during that period. There were Jews in Palestine from the earliest archeological records. If any emigrated from Egypt, they had little impact on the peoples already there.I highly recommend the movie Patterns of Evidence, showcasing the case for the historic account of the Exodus.
Why "over" historical veracity, and not, "along with..." ?Over historical veracity? Yes.
There are plenty of examples where history and theology conflict and generally the theology wins.Why "over" historical veracity, and not, "along with..." ?
Who was this preacher who ran afoul of Roman authority?I have no doubt that there was a Jewish, apocalyptic preacher from Nazareth who had a small following, ran afoul of Roman authority and was crucified. Other than that, I'm very skeptical of anything else in the NT since it is not a history book, it is a theological work.
Yeshua.Who was this preacher who ran afoul of Roman authority?
It is the History of the Jews from beginning to end. The final battle will be there, the return of Jesus will be there. He will set up His throne there. It is in Jerusalem that Heaven itself comes to earth.I have no doubt that there was a Jewish, apocalyptic preacher from Nazareth who had a small following, ran afoul of Roman authority and was crucified. Other than that, I'm very skeptical of anything else in the NT since it is not a history book, it is a theological work.
They executed him. That was pretty foul.Jesus?
In what ways did he run afoul of Roman authority?
Everything you cite comes from the Bible and none from other, contemporary, sources. For instance, if Jesus had 'thousands and thousands and thousands' of followers, I'd expect someone at the time would have mentioned it. As such, I remain skeptical of the claims.It is the History of the Jews from beginning to end. The final battle will be there, the return of Jesus will be there. He will set up His throne there. It is in Jerusalem that Heaven itself comes to earth.
Jesus had no small flock. Thousands and thousands and thousands literally followed behind Him, listening to what he said, and watching Him working miracles. They saw Him come back. It solidified for them that Jesus was truly the Son of God, even if it meant their own death. Jesus sent 70 disciples out to minister in different towns and told them if they weren't well received to wipe the dust from their shoes and move on.
Satisfy your skepticism by gathering End Time prophesy, and see if any of it is familiar. Then ask yourself how some mortal, 2,000 years ago, could have envisioned such prophesies.
That doesn't answer the question. I'm what ways did Jesus run afoul of Roman authority?They executed him. That was pretty foul.
That is unclear. Crucifixion, a punishment only available to the Roman authorities, was generally reserved for serious crimes against Rome, like treason. If the authorities thought Jesus was calling himself 'king', that would certainly qualify as treason.That doesn't answer the question. I'm what ways did Jesus run afoul of Roman authority?
Well, guess what. Romans thought Jesus thought of himself as a king, but they didn't think him a traitor to Rome.That is unclear. Crucifixion, a punishment only available to the Roman authorities, was generally reserved for serious crimes against Rome, like treason. If the authorities thought Jesus was calling himself 'king', that would certainly qualify as treason.
Someone did. The Pharisees.Everything you cite comes from the Bible and none from other, contemporary, sources. For instance, if Jesus had 'thousands and thousands and thousands' of followers, I'd expect someone at the time would have mentioned it. As such, I remain skeptical of the claims.