Non biblical historical sources regarding Jesus

  • Thread starter Thread starter Presurmksdimnds
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
P

Presurmksdimnds

Guest
Are there any writings or recordings outside of the Bible that give credence to the events concerning Jesus?
 
DCNBILL said:
Here is a site with some references.

carm.org/non-biblical-accounts-new-testament-events-andor-people
Click to expand...
Thank you.

How would one approach an arguement such as,

‘The only evidence we have of Jesus’ teachings are the Gospels which the first Church leaders decided would officially be in the bible, which support their claims (of course they wouldn’t allow a gospel to be included if it differed). There is no evidence outside of the bible that Christ actually founded a church at all, let alone on Peter, or for example, that what he said at the Sermon on the Mount is what he actually said?’

I suppose that this is where an act of faith comes in? Does this boil down to calling the first Church leaders liars? Or would there be any outside source, perhaps a gospel or writing that didn’t make the cut to the NT, but is still speaks to this?
 
Presurmksdimnds said:
Thank you.

How would one approach an arguement such as,

‘The only evidence we have of Jesus’ teachings are the Gospels which the first Church leaders decided would officially be in the bible, which support their claims (of course they wouldn’t allow a gospel to be included if it differed). There is no evidence outside of the bible that Christ actually founded a church at all, let alone on Peter, or for example, that what he said at the Sermon on the Mount is what he actually said?’

I suppose that this is where an act of faith comes in? Does this boil down to calling the first Church leaders liars? Or would there be any outside source, perhaps a gospel or writing that didn’t make the cut to the NT, but is still speaks to this?
Click to expand...
It would seem to me silly to challenge the authority of the Church to regulate itself. To ask for a source outside of the Church concerning Church matters is akin to asking do we have any evidence outside of American History that the Declaration of Independence was actually drafted by the forefathers?🤷
 
DCNBILL said:
It would seem to me silly to challenge the authority of the Church to regulate itself. To ask for a source outside of the Church concerning Church matters is akin to asking do we have any evidence outside of American History that the Declaration of Independence was actually drafted by the forefathers?🤷
Click to expand...
I think the challenge being presented is that the early gospel writers were not honest in their testimony of Jesus, and that they wrote the gospels with the language they did, in order to make the case that a Church was established, and give themselves hierarchical power.
 
Presurmksdimnds said:
I think the challenge being presented is that the early gospel writers were not honest in their testimony of Jesus, and that they wrote the gospels with the language they did, in order to make the case that a Church was established, and give themselves hierarchical power.
Click to expand...
That might hold up if each of them hadn’t been systematically tortured and killed for their faith. If they had made it up to gain earthly powers then none of them would have been willing to die for it because that would have meant an end to their earthly authority. As it stands, however, all but one of them died horrific deaths at the hands of non-believers, proclaiming their faith in Christ and his miracles.

That is NOT the act of someone who made something up.
 
Presurmksdimnds said:
I think the challenge being presented is that the early gospel writers were not honest in their testimony of Jesus, and that they wrote the gospels with the language they did, in order to make the case that a Church was established, and give themselves hierarchical power.
Click to expand...
You are assuming that the Gospel writers were hiding in a cave and started churning out the 4 books that we have as the NT.
That is not the case, the Apostles spread to the 4 corners of the known land. Each established churches and taught the faithful.
And in the end as someone also pointed out to you, not only they were killed horribly but many of their followers where killed also.
If the faith was empty and founded on a lie it would have NOT survived 2000 years.

Sorry :cool: but you need to rethink your strategy if you want to attack the Catholic Church and Faith.
 
JerryZ said:
Sorry :cool: but you need to rethink your strategy if you want to attack the Catholic Church and Faith.
Click to expand...
Just a note, he doesn’t seem to be attacking the faith to me. What I’ve read here are genuine inquires into what we believe, and why we believe. He’s been nothing but polite, and that remark came off as rather rude and unwarranted…
 
DCNBILL said:
It would seem to me silly to challenge the authority of the Church to regulate itself. To ask for a source outside of the Church concerning Church matters is akin to asking do we have any evidence outside of American History that the Declaration of Independence was actually drafted by the forefathers?🤷
Click to expand...
👍 well put especially making the linkage/anaology to America history.
If you do not mind might quote you later on this topic.discussion.
 
The evidence that Christ started a church is the church. If Christ didn’t start it, who did? There is no evidence that the church was started by anyone other than Christ. The evidence we DO have (however unreliable he thinks it is) points to Christ as the founder. The Gospels and the link provided above is all we have to go off of in terms of hard evidence right now…and nothing else in existence thoroughly refutes those.

What kind of evidence would your friend expect? A carpenter’s son in a far-flung roman colony traveling with 12 others, telling parables, and preforming miracles for peasant folk in the 1st century AD…does he expect a wiki article from that time or something? 🙂 Most people couldn’t write back then, and the ones who could had more important things on their minds. That’s why its not until later, when the church grew and became more “important” in the larger scheme of things, that we have a written record.
 
I always wondered why something loses historical credibility the moment it is declared “biblical” or “inspired”.

i would appeal to reason. The epistles are the first proof of the existence of a church soon after Christ was crucified. First Thessalonians (ca 51) was probably the first surviving letter to be written. This shows that a church was sprawling less than 20 years after Christ was crucified despite (as someone already mentioned) persecution and martyrdom.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1_Thessalonians
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pauline_epistles
 
That might hold up if each of them hadn’t been systematically tortured and killed for their faith. If they had made it up to gain earthly powers then none of them would have been willing to die for it because that would have meant an end to their earthly authority. As it stands, however, all but one of them died horrific deaths at the hands of non-believers, proclaiming their faith in Christ and his miracles.
Click to expand...
That is NOT the act of someone who made something up.
Click to expand...
This sounds like a reasonable and appropriate response to my question. Reading over the link that was provided for me, thinking back on the discussions we’ve had thus far I have a few more thoughts/questions that I am sure will come up…
Tacitus (A.D. c.55-A.D. c.117, Roman historian) mentions “Christus” who is Jesus - Annals 15.44 A.“Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.”
Click to expand...
The ‘challenge’ or question has also been posed that Jesus was a political activist, and that the Romans had him killed because he came preaching about ‘kingdoms’ and they saw him as a threat, and that many Jewish men were crucified at that time.

I was thinking this over last night though, and my own thought is that the Romans didn’t even pick up on him until he started making rucus amongst the Jewish crowd, and the Jewish crowd wouldn’t have been so upset by him, if he hadn’t made such outrageous claims. Also, no other Jewish men (that I know of) were crucified for the reason that he was.

When I present this quote I am almost sure this line of conversation will come up again.
Pliny the Younger mentioned Christ. Pliny was governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor. Pliny wrote ten books. The tenth around AD 112. A.“They (the Christians) were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; **after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.” **
Click to expand...
The Eucharist?
 
Presurmksdimnds said:
I think the challenge being presented is that the early gospel writers were not honest in their testimony of Jesus, and that they wrote the gospels with the language they did, in order to make the case that a Church was established, and give themselves hierarchical power.
Click to expand...
I see, well it would seem a very grievous lack of foresight for God to come to earth as a man, go through all the bother of living a normal life, teach what the Father expects of us, gather together a faith community (which had a hierarchy by the way), suffer and be killed on the cross and rise again and then not leave anyone in charge. 🤷
 
DCNBILL said:
I see, well it would seem a very grievous lack of foresight for God to come to earth as a man, go through all the bother of living a normal life, teach what the Father expects of us, gather together a faith community (which had a hierarchy by the way), suffer and be killed on the cross and rise again and then not leave anyone in charge. 🤷
Click to expand...
I agree. Unfortunately it seems some have an issue with this particular kind of authority, that didn’t come about until -

wait, the ‘bishops’ from each area were called to the Council of Nicea…so there was a hierarchy. How can one go about proving that there was, before Nicea, a head of that hierarchy? Or was it that up until that time all the bishops were ‘equal’?
 
Presurmksdimnds said:
I agree. Unfortunately it seems some have an issue with this particular kind of authority, that didn’t come about until -

wait, the ‘bishops’ from each area were called to the Council of Nicea…so there was a hierarchy. How can one go about proving that there was, before Nicea, a head of that hierarchy? Or was it that up until that time all the bishops were ‘equal’?
Click to expand...
Here is a good article on the subject.

catholicbasictraining.com/apologetics/coursetexts/4d.htm
 
A remark made by one of the Roman Emperors, Decius (AD 249-251) shows not only the power and influence which the Church possessed in Rome, but also that the Roman authorities certainly knew who the leader of the Church was. “I would rather receive news of a rival to the throne than of another bishop of Rome.” This remark was made shortly after the execution of Pope Fabian in 250 AD – if the bishop of Rome was just another bishop…
Click to expand...
This is good. The challenge is also made that Constantine established the ‘hierarchy’ or at least made a leader of the Church at that point. Here is a previous Emperor recognizing the authority of the Church is already in Rome…even before Constantine.
 
I am currently reading Lee Strobel’s “The Case for Christ”. I am about midway through and so far the beginning has covered a lot of this ground. I can’t put it down 🙂

‘corroborating evidence’ 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top