Jenna Jameson Wax Has Nipples

Jesus in Jesus as historical accounts

How

also highlighted by ZEITGEIST, no historian / writer contemporary with Jesus makes only one reference to his figure (1) This fact is very strange and unreasonable, especially since the Gospel is continual reference to "neutral" and "multitudes" who would follow Jesus and witnessed his many miracles. It is also said repeatedly that his fame was widespread and that he was known everywhere. Yet, despite all historical NO of his time felt the need to mention even remotely in his works the most important figure in the history of man, the son of God, miracle worker and brings the Word God the Father.

Testimonials not contemporaneous

The first historical mentions of Jesus relate to very small steps found in Josephus (c.37 - 100 AD), Pliny the Younger (c. 111-113 AD ), Suetonius (110 AD) and Tacitus (107 -116 AD). First, we must make two important points regarding these steps:

• the authors are not contemporary with Jesus and then, at most, show traditions and tales of second-hand rather than events seen with his own eyes;

• even if these steps were genuine, would prove as the existence of a historical Jesus, but do not prove the historicity of the Gospel story, in particular they do not speak of miracles' report details the teachings of the most important men of history

addition, many scholars and critics say that some of these steps are counterfeit Christians or by the scribes of the Church Fathers.

Testimonium Flavianum

For example, as regards the so-called "Testimonium Flavianum" , that the passage in which Josephus speaks of Christ, the scholar Solomon Zeitlin believes that this is a forgery of the fourth century by Eusebio (2). The main motivation for considering this is a false step that appears for the first time in the fourth century mentioned by Eusebius himself, while it seems that the earlier church fathers were not completely aware of. For example, Origiene (c. 185-254 AD) was familiar with the works of Josephus and yet did not quote this passage and never even complained that the town did not consider Jesus as the Christ! (3) addition, the language used in some parts of the passage seems to come from the pen of the historian Josephus. For further details, see the article by Zeitlin, "The Christ Passage in Josephus " ( http://www.christianorigins.com/zeitlin.html ).

Tacitus: a fake of the fourteenth century?

Something similar can be done about the pace of Tacitus. It appears for the first time in the fourteenth century, and no church father mentioned it before. This is very strange, because the church fathers knew very well and Tacitus certainly would have brought up if he had written something relevant about Christ. But no one says anything until, magically, this step makes its appearance in the fourteenth century. In any event, a bit 'late to be sure of its authenticity. What's more, the pitch does not seem to be written in the style refined typical of the works of Tacitus. For a more detailed discussion, refer to "Who Was Jesus - Fingerprints of the Christ."

Suetonius

The passages referred to by Suetonius hear the apologists Cristina to confirm the historicity of Jesus is contained in the Life of Claudius (c. 113 AD) and is as follows:

" Since the Jews, instigated by ridges, constantly causing the riots. "

The problem with this step is probably not in any way relates to Jesus Christ. " Cresto " was a very common name at the time, which is not equivalent, as erroneously say the apologists, the term "Christos" or Christ. So, this Chrestos could be anyone, but it is unlikely that Suetonius could ever settle the most important man in history in such a tiny phrase from the small historical value.

Pliny the Younger

As for Pliny the Younger, governor of Bithynia, apologists take as evidence of the fact that Christ in his letter requesting help to counter- Christiani " . At most, what you can see from this letter is that there was a movement known as "Christian" at a time when Pliny was governor in Bithynia, ie 111-113 AD However, we do not know and never will know if he was referring to Christians as followers of Jesus Christ, even if it was, this late testimony does not prove the existence of a certain man named Jesus, the son of God and miracle worker overtime.

Conclusion

This I have proposed is only a summary of the matter, which can be found widely traded in the works of Christian apologists and historians. In particular, the archaeologist and historian DM Murdock in a chapter of his book "Who Was Jesus - Fingerprints of the Christ "deals extensively with the issue, showing all the steps also" implicated "and discussions of the scholars on them.

----------------------------------------------- ---

1. For a list of 23 historical / literary contemporaries to Jesus refer to "Who-Was Jesus Fingerprints of the Christ", pg. 85

2. The Christ Passage in Josephus' - http://www.christianorigins.com/zeitlin.html

3. Origen, Contra Celsus I, 47