Historical Proof of Christ (part 2)

[2PhiloVoid]

Yes so I am correct you guys are saying philosophy has verisimilitude and I am saying you can't prove it does. It may in fact have it, it may have a 'likeness to life.' But you cannot prove it does. That was what I was asking for proof. The Bible can be proven to have verisimilitude via historical quotes in historical documents (contemporary to the Bible's characters), or from archaeology. So the version of verisimilitude as found in the Bible is proven versus theoretical.

Personally, and with my own understanding about the implications of the Philosophy of History in tow, I think a better word than either 'proven' or 'theoretical' here would be: representational.

Just say'n, bro! But that's me.

 

[Oncedeceived]

The Koran contains accurate dates, towns, and people? --- I must have missed this when I read it all the way through.

Other than the parts that were taken from the Bible.

 

[createdtoworship]

Personally, and with my own understanding about the implications of the Philosophy of History in tow, I think a better word than either 'proven' or 'theoretical' here would be: representational.

Just say'n, bro! But that's me.

I am good. proven is just to me empirical evidence, or direct evidence. Versus circumstantial. But I know proof is only something math can offer or logical arguments. But as far as historical documentation being true, this is the highest form of evidence you can get. That is verisimilitude.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

Other than the parts that were taken from the Bible.

Yeah, that!

 

[BigV]

I will update the OP with the quotes of other jews and non jews that believed Jesus not only existed but was crucified. (I have another thread on solid proof of Jesus resurrection), this one is historic proof that he existed in general. See there is something called "verisimilitude." Ask any jewish non christian archaeologist in Israel and they all honor the 4 gospel accounts as they have 'verisimilitude." Alexander the Great for example has no manuscripts that have this. Ptolemy Alexander's friend's accounts did not have 'verisimilitude." For example. The statues of Alexander are late or have uncertain dates. There are no writings of Alexander, and no official biography. There is mythical elements to Alexander the great. Many believed he was divine. So if I was to say the John Rylands Gospel of John which is about 40 years after the death of the last disciple is unhistoric, then we must also say that Alexander the great is unhistoric. Because if Jesus is not historically valid, the for sure Alexander the great never existed. Hannibal never crossed the alps and you can basically toss out all of ancient history for that matter.

I'd be surprised if there were NOT 100's or 100,000's of Jesus' and some of whom were bound to be crucified. So if you do find Jews talking about Jesus, you have your work cut out for you in proving everything else about Jesus.

However, I have two simple questions for you.

1) According to the historical records, what was the name of Jesus' paternal grandfather?

2) Secondly, if miracles are possible, as you allege for Jesus, how did you determine the stories about Alexander the Great had mythical elements? Perhaps the 'mythical' were actually historical, but those pesky naturalists keep denying that?

 

[createdtoworship]

I'd be surprised if there were NOT 100's or 100,000's of Jesus' and some of whom were bound to be crucified. So if you do find Jews talking about Jesus, you have your work cut out for you in proving everything else about Jesus.

However, I have two simple questions for you.

1) According to the historical records, what was the name of Jesus' paternal grandfather?

2) Secondly, if miracles are possible, as you allege for Jesus, how did you determine the stories about Alexander the Great had mythical elements? Perhaps the 'mythical' were actually historical, but those pesky naturalists keep denying that?

I don't know of many people named Jesus that died as 'king of the Jews.' I mean how man people did that? how many religious leaders name Jesus even existed in that few hundred year time span? But lets answer some of your other questions. I have no clue about the grandfather, and I don't honestly care. Secondly, my comparison with alexander the great being mythological, is that many deified him as he was such a quick military campaigns, he was lightening fast. That is why he succeeded. But if The bible is mythological because Jesus is devine, then why isn't alexander the great?