Your thoughts on Jesus

[Jeff V]

OK.

I was beginning to think you were a bit off, and now I find your Mr OOO I'm confused but still leaning towards a bit off.

Wasn't he a terrorist? I thought he was executed for inciting riots and vandalising temples?

A charismatic cult leader can create a mob following on the flisiest of premises.

Jesus had followers, Koresh had followers, Bin Laden has followers. All in the same boat in my book.

(Note. expected response from Xstians, "yeah but we're perfectly reasonable, Bin Laden and his lot are crackers". See the irony. They think the same about you)

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

Wasn't he a terrorist?

According to Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, "Jesus was the first socialist." Oddly enough, that's probably the only point on which Mr. Chavez and I agree. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[Jeff V]

Yea Jesus and David Koresh 2 peas in a pod.

Now you're just being ridiculous.

EDIT- add Bin Laden and make it 3 peas-stillridiculous.

Oh, I'm sorry - you wanted a serious response.

[ QUOTE ]
The New Testament has more ancient manuscript evidence than any other work in history. It is also remarkably close from translation to translation- see your goofy comment below.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, that's because they're all copied from original works, the first one written a generation after Jesus died.

Simple question - who wrote the various books of the NT? When?

Second simple question - is there a non biblical account of the life of Jesus? Who wrote it?

Third simple question - why did none of the Jewish or Roman historians of the day (many of whom have surviving works) document a man who performed amazing miracles witnessed by hundreds, caused civil unrest, and went on to have a major religious following after his death?

[bills217]

[ QUOTE ]
Simple question - who wrote the various books of the NT? When?

[/ QUOTE ]

From what I understand, you are correct on the timing.

The 4 Gospels are named for their authors. Paul wrote most of the other NT books, his "letters"...John is generally regarded to have written Revelation...that covers most of them, don't feel like researching the rest right now.

[ QUOTE ]
Second simple question - is there a non biblical account of the life of Jesus? Who wrote it?

[/ QUOTE ]

A secular historian of that time named Josephus wrote about the life of Jesus and even mentioned his resurrection. Can't remember the title of the collection of his works, something like "The Writings of Josephus." This text is easy to come by...I know a couple people who have one. It's also important to note that the passages about Jesus are contained within a much, MUCH larger secular text...he wasn't the focus by a long shot.

[ QUOTE ]
The 4 Gospels are named for their authors.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, the four gospels were given names based on guesses of the the second century church. Before around 180 AD every document claiming to quote some teaching of Jesus never claims to quote from the gospel of ____. Around 180 AD a man names Irenaeus writes "Against Heresies" and includes references to named gospels. After this date it suddenly becomes common to quote from the gospel of _____.

[ QUOTE ]
Paul wrote most of the other NT books, his "letters"

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, the only letters that were traditionally attributed to Paul that are still generally accepted by scholars to be his work are:

Rom, Cor I and II, Gal, Philippians, Thes I, and Philemon.

Note: these letters are the ONLY books in the NT whose traditional authors stand up to modern scrutiny.

[ QUOTE ]
...John is generally regarded to have written Revelation

[/ QUOTE ]

Someone named John wrote Revelation (the text is one of the few books that actually names it's author) but nothing in it suggests that it is the same John as is traditionally granted authorship of the Gospel of John (John the son of Zebedee) and modern research has generally concluded that he didn't write that either.

[ QUOTE ]
SA secular historian of that time named Josephus wrote about the life of Jesus and even mentioned his resurrection. Can't remember the title of the collection of his works, something like "The Writings of Josephus." This text is easy to come by...I know a couple people who have one. It's also important to note that the passages about Jesus are contained within a much, MUCH larger secular text...he wasn't the focus by a long shot.

[/ QUOTE ]
Here's the famous quote:

[ QUOTE ]
At this time there appeared Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one should call him a man. For he was a doer of startling deeds, a teacher of the people who receive the truth with pleasure. And he gained a following both among many Jews and among many of Greek origin. He was the Messiah. And when Pilate, because of an accusation made by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him previously did not cease to do so. For he appeared to them on the third day, living again, just as the divine prophets had spoken of these and countless other wondrous things about him. And up until this very day the tribe of Christians, named after him, has not died out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Remember, Josephus was not a Christian but a Jew. However, the style is that of a devoted Christian. For this reason this is a very controvertial quote. The copies we have today are not originals but opies made over the centuries - mostly by Christian monks. Some believe it was all inserted wholesale by a transcribing monk in the 3rd century (or so), others claim it was embellished. Very few serious scholars take this quote at face value (basically, only committed fundamentalists do). It is also important to note that this quote only became common in Christian writings after 300 AD. Before then early church fathers wrote of their anguish that no independent accounts of Jesus existed, even though Josephus' work was readily available to them.

It is also the only non-biblical contemporary reference to Jesus. There aren't even any references to lost references. This is it.

[Jeff V]

[ QUOTE ]
However, the style is that of a devoted Christian. For this reason this is a very controvertial quote.

[/ QUOTE ]

And if not for that reason than another.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
However, the style is that of a devoted Christian. For this reason this is a very controvertial quote.

[/ QUOTE ]

And if not for that reason than another.

[/ QUOTE ]
You seem to be implying that those who doubt the legitimacy of this quote are just being argumentative. It's not just a handful of cantankerous atheists who agrue that this text has been compromised. Christians have been arguing about it for over 300 years (i.e. ever since it became possible to argue about these issues in the western world without getting burned at the stake just for speaking up).