Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Tacitus was a historian. Based on your logic, every modern history book should be disregarded as hearsay because the authors were not alive to witness the history unfold.
Explain to KTS that Tacitus is a credible historian and his works should not be dismissed as "hearsay". Unless, of course, you don't think Tacitus is a credible historian. Then I would have to ask KTS and yourself for evidence to justify that claim.
Tacitus was a historian. Based on your logic, every modern history book should be disregarded as hearsay because the authors were not alive to witness the history unfold.
That sounds like you missed the point.1. People come to believe things for all kinds of reasons (rational as well as irrational)
2. People who are Christians believe that God exists.
3. Therefore, people who are Christians came to believe that God exists for one or more particular reasons, part of the set of P1 being "all kinds of reasons", and wich are not necessarily rational reasons.
Seems like an entirely useless argument.
You didn't look very hard, or else not very honestly then.What was i looking for? Well evidenced facts about the historicity of the NT.
You didn't look very hard, or else not very honestly then.
Or, maybe just not in the right place (starting with seeking the Kingdom of God above all else).
I realize that in some churches and in some countries, any evidence you could find there would just turn you more against christendom instead of toward God's Kingdom.
But that is just looking "to man" for what you were seeking,
and man will always fail you.
As long as you think that way,The bible was written by men and many of them anonymous.
The bible was written by men and many of them anonymous.
I am always surprised when Christians try to base an argument on the assertion that "Tacitus was a credible historian... that shows Jesus is real."Explain to KTS that Tacitus is a credible historian and his works should not be dismissed as "hearsay". Unless, of course, you don't think Tacitus is a credible historian. Then I would have to ask KTS and yourself for evidence to justify that claim.
OK, then I will ask you. Why is Tacitus not a credible historian? What evidence do you have? Britannica.com claimed that he "was the greatest historian who wrote in the Latin language". So why is the historians atime Britannica.com wrong?I am always surprised when Christians try to base an argument on the assertion that "Tacitus was a credible historian... that shows Jesus is real."
If you indeed believe that the events that Tacitus he recounted are based on reality... then you would also have to accept that Christans were the scum of the earth, vile humans, doers of all kind of evil and responsible for arson and murder.
OK, then I will ask you. Why is Tacitus not a credible historian? What evidence do you have? Britannica.com claimed that he "was the greatest historian who wrote in the Latin language". So why is the historians atime Britannica.com wrong?
He validated that the man Jesus actually existed, was crucified, and worshipped as a result. You are correct that it does not prove christianity as the true religion and it does not prove that Jesus is the Christ. It does provide extra-bliblical evidence that Jesus existed.He is not wrong... and that's the point. Invoking Tacitus to validate Christianity is like invoking any historian today to validate Mormonism.
Neither were there in the mide of the events taking place. All we have is hustorical descriotion that people practiced certain religion... that's all you get from Tacitus.
Why would that validate anything? Did Tacitus write that he observed Jesus perform miracles? In the very least, did Tacitus interview eyewitnesses?
Again, all you get from Tacitus is that there was a Christian religion. Great. There is Scientology today and historians documented that scientologists practice something.
Is that all we get from the "greatest event in human history"?
Are you suggesting that the historians at Britannica.com are wrong about Tacitus? Can you provide any evidence that says Tacitus is not a credible historian.Yeah, it's not like modern historians don't have access to letters written at the time of the events they are describing, or photographs, etc.
We have photos, videos and a huge amount of records and documents of the Vietnam war, so I can write a book about it and be sure that it is accurate, even though it happened before I was born. Do you see? I have access to PRIMARY SOURCES. Wikipedia says, "In the study of history as an academic discipline, a primary source (also called original source or evidence) is an artifact, a document, a recording, or other source of information that was created at the time under study. It serves as an original source of information about the topic."
We have many primary sources about a huge amount of history.
Can you give me a single primary source regarding Jesus?
Perhaps you should tell the historians at Britannica.com that they are wrong about Tacitus. I am sure they will heed your council because of your superiority in the field of antiquity. [emoji4]If he never gives any sources for his claims, and never saw the things for himself, how do we know that he isn't just repeating stories that other people have told him?
Given that Tacitus also got Pilate's rank wrong (Tacitus says he was a procurator, while primary sources - things made at the time, not afterwards - show that Pilate was actually a Prefect), it is quite possible that Tacitus was just getting his information from someone telling him a story, and Tacitus wrote it down as fact. Of course, that doesn't mean it IS fact.
He validated that the man Jesus actually existed, was crucified, and worshipped as a result. You are correct that it does not prove christianity as the true religion and it does not prove that Jesus is the Christ. It does provide extra-bliblical evidence that Jesus existed.
As long as you think that way,
the Creator of the Universe and the Author of "our faith"(ekklesia)
isn't likely to answer you. (as far as I know)
But, none-the-less,
if you seek God's Kingdom, (ask HIM,not men)
His Promise is that you will find it.
He will teach you what He wants to - It IS HIS KINGDOM , not mine,
not man's, not the churches.
We simply get to be in HIS KINGDOM , when He calls us and chooses us.
He does whatever He pleases.
Isn't it the same men, many of them anonymous, who wrote the bible, who say He said that?Remember He always said, If you reject the men He choose and sent,
then you reject Him.
He won't have anything to do with you then.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?