Philosoft said:
Thanks, but I understand even that claim is in dispute.
The passages in Josephus that mention Christ are heavily disputed. I'm surprised you're not aware of that.
Hey.
The two statements are claims, but in order to establish that something is a fact, there must be at the very least more supportive evidence than not. These two claims are highly supported...
That a man named Jesus lived at the alleged time and place was very well known and was reported of in writings of hostile Romans as well as Jews (all mentioned were non-Christians) should not be a great dispute, because the great majority of supporting evidence is in its favor. The historical writing works of:
* Tacitus (in
Annals)
* the testimony of Suetonius "As translator of Suetonius work,
The Twelve Caesars, declared:
Suetonius was fortunate in having ready access to the Imperial and Senatorial archives and to a great body of contemporary memoirs and public documents, and in having himself lived nearly thirty years under the Caesars. Much of his information about Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, and Nero comes from eye-witnesses of the events described (Seutonius, 1957, p. 7)."
* Pliny the Younger
* Celsus, a second-century pagan philosopher (in
True Discourse)
* the
Talmud
* the works of Josephus
(A more recent work
* HG Wells (1931:
The Outline of History, referred to Christ as "a prophet with unprecedented power," pg.270.)
You could say about the testimonies of these witnesses to Christ's historocity that the "Roman sources that mention him are all dependent on Christian reports." However, there is no evidence to support that claim, but "all available evidence militates against it. Furthermore, it is an untenable position to suggest that upper class Roman historians would submit for inclusion in the official annals of Roman History (to be preserved for posterity) facts that were related to them by a notorius tribe of 'mischievous', 'depraved', 'superstitious' misfits."
These works alone prove that Jesus actually lived, whether or not his teachings were agreeable to them. However, the Gospels themselves contain more information about the life of Jesus than any other source. The question is though, are they reliable? How do they compare with other historical writings?
"...there are 5,366 manuscripts of the Greek New Testament in existence today, in whole or in part, that serve to corroborate the accuracy of the New Testament. The best manuscripts of the New Testament are dated at roughly
A.D. 350, with perhaps one of the most important of these being the Codex Vaticanus, 'the chief treasure of the Vatican Library in Rome,' and the Codex Sinaiticus, which was purchased by the British from the Soviet Government in 1933 (Bruce, 1953, p. 20). Additionally, the Chester Beatty papyri, made public in 1931, contain eleven codices, three of which contain most of the New Testament (including the Gospels). Two of these codices boast of a date in the first half of the third century, while the third slides in a little later, being dated in the last half of the same century (Bruce, 1953, p. 21). The John Rylands Library boasts of even earlier evidence. A papyrus codex containing parts of John 18 dates to the time of Hadrian, who reigned from
A.D. 117 to 138 (Bruce, 1953, p. 21)."
It is true that the New Testament "enjoys far more historical documentation than any other volume ever known.. The 'apostolic fathers':Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian, Tatian, Clement of Rome, and Ignatius (writing before the close of the second century) all provided citations from one or more of the Gospels (Guthrie, 1990, p. 24).
From another source, F.F. Bruce, eminent professor at Univ. of Manchester, England and author of
The New Testament Documents: Are They Reliable?: "There is no body of ancient literature in the world which enjoys such a wealth of good textual attestation as the New Testament." The total number of Greek manuscripts is at 5,664, not including the thousands of other ancient New Testament manuscripts in other languages. (Total, about 24,000)
"If we maintain that the life of our Lord is not a historical event, we are landed in hopeless difficulties; in consistency, we shall have to give up all ancient history and deny that there ever was such an event as the assassination of Julius Caesar" ~Linton (Monser, 1961, p. 377)
I will quote the sources undocumented if you PM me. (my # of posts won't allow me to post website addresses)
I will respond to the Reserrection claim and the specific disputes of Josephus later. ~I need to get to bed