Jesus in other historical documents...

User avatar
_MightyHalo
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 2:19 pm
Location: New England

Post by _MightyHalo » Tue Feb 28, 2006 1:53 pm

loaves wrote:Also, MightyHalo, ask the atheists this: Why did, all of sudden, thousands (possibly tens of thousands) of people become converted to Christianity in the first century? Were they just crazy and madcap? Were they misled? Or is something else going on? This mass conversion was unprecedented during that time period.

When Mohammed and his cronies invented Islam, it took years and years and years … for them to build up the trust of the Arab world, and eventually gain some converts.

But, in first-century Christianity, the conversions are seemingly immediate and abrupt. Was this just an emotional impulse? Or is something deeper going on? Holy Spirit, maybe???
Thanks Loaves! That is a good question... however they may want me to give examples of where I got that information as well. Where might I find reference to "thousands to ten-thousands converted", or is this pretty much general knowledge... Im so not good at history... LOL

- Sir Mighty Halo (Brian)
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:

User avatar
_Paidion
Posts: 944
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 7:42 pm
Location: Chapple, Ontario

Post by _Paidion » Tue Feb 28, 2006 3:29 pm

But when do the atheists say the Christians forged it.
I've never known them to say when.... only that Christians did it.

The cannot say when, of course. For there is no historical evidence for their claim.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Paidion
Avatar --- Age 45
"Not one soul will ever be redeemed from hell but by being saved from his sins, from the evil in him." --- George MacDonald

User avatar
_chriscarani
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 6:47 pm
Location: Ft Collins, CO

Post by _chriscarani » Tue Feb 28, 2006 4:21 pm

Hey guys just thought I would chime here.

There is a popular theory that Luke was the forger and changed and added to some of the Testimonium Flavium. The theory was supposedly substantiated by a mathematical analysis of the book of Acts, Luke and the writings of Josephus. When compared statistically they were the same author, according to this theory. So that would place the "forgeries" taking place in the late first century, early second second century.

I personally don’t buy it, but just thought you might like to be prepared for that argument.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
WWMTLFSMM

User avatar
_MightyHalo
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 2:19 pm
Location: New England

Post by _MightyHalo » Tue Feb 28, 2006 4:29 pm

chriscarani wrote:Hey guys just thought I would chime here.

There is a popular theory that Luke was the forger and changed and added to some of the Testimonium Flavium. The theory was supposedly substantiated by a mathematical analysis of the book of Acts, Luke and the writings of Josephus. When compared statistically they were the same author, according to this theory. So that would place the "forgeries" taking place in the late first century, early second second century.

I personally don’t buy it, but just thought you might like to be prepared for that argument.
Wow! That is pretty intense... Ive only been a member of this site for a few days and have gotten my moneys worth already! hee hee...

You wouldnt happen to know where/who/when that mathematical analysis took place and if its easy to find would you?

Thanks again everyone!!

- Sir Mighty Halo (Brian)
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:

User avatar
_chriscarani
Posts: 153
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 6:47 pm
Location: Ft Collins, CO

Post by _chriscarani » Tue Feb 28, 2006 5:18 pm

The theory I mention above came up in a debate online about a year ago, so I will try to dig that up. There are other theories out there regarding Luke and Josephus that are more mainstream, just type the two names into google and you should get plenty of articles. Still others will say that the changes were a result of several Christian interpolators in the 3rd and 4th centuries.

But, all of this is beside the point. We don’t need Josephus to tell us Christ is Lord. We know this already from scripture. The dilemma exists, because this “non-biased” historical document is the only one of its kind, (In the sense, it is esteemed as such from non-Christian scholars) and it supports the existence of Jesus. What we can deduce from the writings of Josephus, regardless of the disputed passages, is that a man Jesus did live, around the time the gospels have purported him to have lived.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
WWMTLFSMM

User avatar
_MightyHalo
Posts: 17
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 2:19 pm
Location: New England

Post by _MightyHalo » Tue Feb 28, 2006 5:31 pm

chriscarani wrote:But, all of this is beside the point. We don’t need Josephus to tell us Christ is Lord. We know this already from scripture. The dilemma exists, because this “non-biased” historical document is the only one of its kind, (In the sense, it is esteemed as such from non-Christian scholars) and it supports the existence of Jesus. What we can deduce from the writings of Josephus, regardless of the disputed passages, is that a man Jesus did live, around the time the gospels have purported him to have lived.
Amen Brother... Amen!

- Sir Mighty Halo (Brian)
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:

User avatar
_loaves
Posts: 251
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 9:52 pm

Post by _loaves » Tue Feb 28, 2006 6:01 pm

MightyHalo wrote:Thanks Loaves! That is a good question... however they may want me to give examples of where I got that information as well. Where might I find reference to "thousands to ten-thousands converted", or is this pretty much general knowledge... Im so not good at history...
MightyHalo: Here is some stuff I dug up:
Founders Blog wrote: God chose to plant the Gospel in the first century in the city of Jerusalem. Pentecost saw 3000 converts in one day (Acts 2:41). Shortly after that the total number of those who had been converted in the city was at 5000 (Acts 4:4). Many think Luke is speaking exclusively of male converts but that is debatable due to the way that he later uses the word in question (see 17:34). Even so, if women and children were not included in the 5000 then the total number of converts might have been around 10-12,000.

The population of Jerusalem at that time is hard to know with a high degree of certainty. Estimates from less than 100,000 to over 2 million have been made. William Smith thinks that it was perhaps 40,000 to 50,000. Josephus says that when Titus layed siege to the city that the population was 3 million. Tacitus says it was 600,000, which Smith suggests is a more realistic estimate. It is probably safe to assume, especially in light of the passover pilgrims, that hundreds of thousands of people were in Jerusalem when Peter preached at Pentecost.

What happened in Jerusalem as a result of several thousand people being converted? Acts 5:28 quotes the Jewish High Priest as accusing the disciples of having "filled Jerusalem with [their] doctrine." The whole city was turned upside down by these new converts. Remember, they did not have any Christian churches or background on which to draw. They did not have any built in support system, but rather had to construct such systems through the church. Jerusalem was not the same as before all these conversions took place. Life changed in the city because lives were changed by the Gospel. Conversion made a difference.

Source: http://www.founders.org/blog/2005/08/do ... rence.html

christiancourier.com wrote: </i><b>A Religious Explosion</b></i>
For some reason – that scarcely can be explained on ordinary bases – the religion of Christ exploded on the landscape of first-century society. Jesus had only a handful of men (the apostles) who functioned as the leaders of his cause. From this tiny seed came the mighty Christian movement.

On the day of its birth the community of believers consisted of a minimum of 3,000 persons (<b>Acts 2:41</b>). If the numeral 3,000 constituted only those immersed that day, and not those disciples previously baptized by John the Baptist (<b>Mt. 3:5-6</b>) and the Lord’s disciples (<b>Jn. 4:1-2</b>), the total was significantly larger. Within a relatively short period of time, the number of saints was computed at 5,000 adult men (<b>Acts 4:4</b>), not to mention the thousands of women who likewise were added to the body of believers.

It has been estimated that by the time Stephen was martyred (<b>Acts 7:60</b>), the Jerusalem church consisted of no fewer than 20,000 souls (<b>Kistemaker, p. 148</b>). This represented more than one-third of the estimated 55,000 citizens in Jerusalem at that time (<b>Jeremias, p. 83</b>).

Beyond that, the gospel rapidly spread from Palestine into Africa (<b>Acts 8</b>), Syria (<b>Acts 9</b>), Asia Minor (<b>Acts 13ff</b>), and finally into Europe (<b>Acts 16ff</b>). Paul, whose tireless travels spanned some 12,000 miles, evangelized from Jerusalem to Rome – and perhaps as far as Spain (<b>Rom. 15:24,28</b>).
<b>Clement of Rome</b> (c. A.D. 95) says that Paul reached “the boundary of the west” (<b>1 Clement 5</b>), which could be an allusion to Spain. Both <b>Irenaeus</b> (<b>Against Heresies, 1.10.2</b>) and <b>Tertullian</b> (<b>Against Jews, 7</b>) confirm the presence of Christians in Spain in the 2nd century A.D.

Christianity swept over the Roman empire like a tidal wave. The New Testament pays tribute to this phenomenal growth. The Christians were charged with having “turned the world upside down” (<b>Acts 17:6</b>). Their “sound went out into all the earth” (<b>Rom. 10:18</b>); and was “bearing fruit” everywhere (<b>Col. 1:6</b>).

<b>Historian Will Durant</b> (following the lead of <b>Edward Gibbon</b>) argued that by A.D. 300, a quarter of the eastern segment of the empire was Christian, while about one twentieth of the western division was similarly identified (<b>p. 603</b>). Those figures are now considered to be too conservative.

<b>E.M. Blaiklock</b> has noted that studies of the <b>catacombs beneath the city of Rome</b> (about 600 miles of galleries) contain somewhere between 1,750,000 and 4,000,000 “Christian” graves. He estimates that in the middle Empire at least twenty percent of Rome’s citizenry was made up of Christians – and at times the percentage was greater even. [Note: These tombs reflect an association with the Christian cause, though many of those buried doubtless had digressed from the pristine format.] The catacombs represent ten generations of believers (<b>p. 159</b>). This would suggest that the city of Rome itself had somewhere between 175,000 to 400,000 Christians – each generation spanned! This is staggering.

The testimony of <b>Tertullian</b> (c. A.D. 160-220) is most dramatic: “Men proclaim that the state is beset with us. Every age, condition, and rank is coming over to us. We are only of yesterday, but already we fill the world” (<b>Apology, 37.4</b>).

Moreover, as we shall subsequently observe, this wild-fire growth was achieved under the most adverse circumstances. Again, the question cries out for an answer: What was the cause to which this amazing growth may be attributed? What <i>natural</i> circumstances can account for this?

There is another powerful fact that may be mentioned briefly at this point. The initial impact of the gospel was within the Jewish community. The nucleus of the early church was Hebrew. As indicated above, many thousands of Jews converted to Christianity. It is an indisputable historical fact, however, that the Jews were strict monotheists. To them, there was but one deity. And yet, without controversy is the fact that Jesus made the claim of being divine (<b>cf. Jn. 5:18; 8:58; 10:30</b>). Surely only the strongest sort of evidence would persuade a Jewish mind to acknowledge the humble Nazarene as “God” (<b>cf. Jn. 20:28</b>).

Source: http://www.christiancourier.com/feature/july99.htm

(Emphasis added by Loaves)
MightyHalo: I hope this wasn’t too much for you. There seems to be ample evidence from contemporaries of Josephus, etc., not to mention the catacombs under the city of Rome. Now, like with most people, I don’t agree with a lot of what these websites say, I was just using them for the info. You know how it goes …

Yours in Jesus,
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Agape,

loaves

"And when he had taken the five loaves and the two fishes, he looked up to heaven, and blessed, and brake the loaves...And they did all eat, and were filled" (Mark 6:41-42)

User avatar
_loaves
Posts: 251
Joined: Fri Jan 13, 2006 9:52 pm

Post by _loaves » Tue Feb 28, 2006 8:35 pm

Another thing you can hit them with is Creationism, or “how could this possibly happen by chance.” Because, if they are genuine atheists, they rely totally on random happenings. I remember, way back, about a study being done called the “Chaos Theory.” This study was done by complete pagans. Using high-level mathematics and Artificial Intelligence, their “Chaos Theory” hypothesis was proven true. The hypothesis was that nothing was truly random. There are explicit patterns which occur in daily life. But please correct me, anyone, if these facts aren’t true.

Now, I don’t want to debate the “Big Bang Theory,” but I don’t believe in it, and here is something to burst their bubble with: <b>when has an explosion ever resulted in something more orderly and structured.</b> No to mention, the “Big Bang Theory” violates the Biblical timeline, etc.

Another way to arm yourself is to tell them how fine-tuned our universe is, and how the fingerprints God are everywhere! The following is a compilation of interesting tidbits that I have collection over the years:

If the oxygen levels in the air we breath rose 5%, forrest fires would double.

If our body temperature rose or fell 8 degrees (Fahrenheit), we would die.

If the mass difference between the neutron and proton changed 2%, then all neutrons would spontaneously decay into protons, and the only atom in the universe would be hydrogen-1, or its respective ionic variants.

We all know that protons have a positive charge, and electrons have a negative charge. If these charges were imbalanced by as little as 0.00000001%, all of the atoms in the entire universe would instantaneously explode.

<b>Can that sensitivity possibly be a result of chance?</b> Not only does atheism violate the Bible, it also infringes on common sense.

<b>It takes a lot of faith to believe in atheism, and I don’t see how people do it.</b>

God bless you,
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Agape,

loaves

"And when he had taken the five loaves and the two fishes, he looked up to heaven, and blessed, and brake the loaves...And they did all eat, and were filled" (Mark 6:41-42)

User avatar
_Paidion
Posts: 944
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 7:42 pm
Location: Chapple, Ontario

Post by _Paidion » Tue Feb 28, 2006 8:52 pm

There is a popular theory that Luke was the forger and changed and added to some of the Testimonium Flavium. The theory was supposedly substantiated by a mathematical analysis of the book of Acts, Luke and the writings of Josephus. When compared statistically they were the same author, according to this theory.
In my opinion, that "popular theory" is ludicrous!

For the so-called interpolation is only a paragraph. There is not enough substance to it, to carry out that kind of analysis.

Here is the "interpolation":

Now, there was a man about this time, Jesus, a wise man, if it is fitting to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works --- a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was Messiah; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had froetold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concering him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct to this day.

In my opinion the word structure and phraseology is not that of Luke.
Where, for example, do you find, either in Luke's gospel, or in Acts, the expression "the tribe of Christians"?
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Paidion
Avatar --- Age 45
"Not one soul will ever be redeemed from hell but by being saved from his sins, from the evil in him." --- George MacDonald

User avatar
_Derek
Posts: 291
Joined: Mon Dec 05, 2005 12:27 am
Location: Marietta GA

Post by _Derek » Wed Mar 01, 2006 12:00 am

Hey all,
Here is a link to the C.A.R.M. website where Matt Slick wrote a little piece on what could be expected to be the original writing of Josephus <b>if</b> an interpolation occured. Personally, it would seem a bit odd to me for Josephus to call Jesus the Messiah and not follow Him his self. But, like Paidion said, there's no proof that he didn't write it.

http://www.carm.org/evidence/Josephus_Jesus.htm

God bless,
Derek
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Derek

Some trust in chariots, and some in horses: but we will remember the name of the LORD our God.
Psalm 20:7

Post Reply

Return to “Christian Evidences & Challenges”