DO YOU BELIEVE IN THE EXISTENCE OF SOCRATES? ALEXANDER THE GREAT? JULIUS CAESAR? IF HISTORICITY IS ESTABLISHED BY WRITTEN RECORDS IN MULTIPL | image tagged in caesar | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
1,422 views, 19 upvotes, Made by allthingsright 16 months ago caesar
Add Meme
Post Comment
reply
5 ups
Futurama Fry Meme | IF CAESAR WASN'T ALIVE, THEN WHO DID THEY NAME THE SALAD AFTER | image tagged in memes,futurama fry | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
2 ups
Julius Caesar and Alexander the Great existed just as well as Jesus did.
reply
2 ups
VENI, VIDI, FECE I CAME, I SAW, IT WAS ALL BULLSHIT | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
reply
1 up, 1 reply
I'm not even religious and I believe Jesus existed
reply
0 ups
Distracted Boyfriend Meme | SOME CUTE WOMAN ME MY CHURCH | image tagged in memes,distracted boyfriend | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
not the bible one. but their is a soccer player named Jesus
reply
3 ups
But zero evidence for a god. I read a story where thunder was actually just a guy with a big hammer. So I guess that settles it?
reply
1 up, 1 reply
X, X Everywhere Meme | EVIDENCE OF MIRACLES EVIDENCE OF MIRACLES NOWHERE | image tagged in memes,x,x everywhere,x x everywhere | made w/ Imgflip meme maker
The gospels are horribly unreliable. They contain fanciful and obviously mythological elements such as miracles, a virgin birth, a resurrection from the dead, angels and demons, etc.

They don't even agree with each other. Matthew says Jesus was born during the reign of King Herod, who died in 4 BCE. Luke says he was born around the time of the census of Quirinius, which was around 6-7 CE. There is no overlap. That's like saying someone was born during the presidency of Ronald Reagan, and also while the Vietnam War was going on. It can't be during both.

The gospels contain events which have no historical corroboration at all. There is no historical corroboration for Herod's massacre of the young boys. There is no historical corroboration for the temple curtain tearing in half. If the curtain in the Jewish temple actually tore from top to bottom miraculously, why did not a single historian, Jewish or gentile, mention it at the time? No contemporary historical corroboration for the crucifixion darkness or earthquake, or the resurrection itself. Not even a contemporary mention of Jesus himself, written during his lifetime.

They also contain historical absurdities, such as the Romans releasing a prisoner during Passover, the Sanhedrin gathering on Passover eve to go after Jesus, Jesus singlehandedly throwing the money changers out of the temple courtyard (an area the size of a few football fields), Pilate giving in to the demands of the crowd like a spineless whimp, etc. Women going to a tomb to handle the dead body of a man also seems absurd, given Jewish custom.

Early documents and a willingness to die for their beliefs prove nothing, since you also have those in Mormonism.

I believe there was likely a person that the Gospels were based on, but I certainly don't believe he did all the things the Bible says he did.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
There are in depth understandings for those who wish to dig...The Greek word for “first” in Luke 2:2 is protos and can be translated “before.” Thus Luke 2:2 could actually be translated, “This was the census taken before Quirinius was governor of Syria.”
Another explanation could be, Quirinius actually ruled Syria on two separate occasions and there were actually two censuses taken. The “first census” mentioned in Luke 2:2 occurred during his first term as governor, and another was ordered during his second term as governor mentioned in Acts 5:37, which probably took place between AD 6-7 (Josephus links this census to an uprising under Judas of Galilee). With Luke being the author of both Luke and Acts and wanting to write in “consecutive order” (Luke 1:3), it would seem unlikely for Luke to make such a mistake in dating.

There is a long list of famous historians, including Roman ones, that risked their reputations and in some cases, their very lives, on reporting the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ:
Pliny the Younger (62-114AD)
Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus (75-130AD)
Cornelius Tacitus (55-120AD)
Pontius Pilate’s wife’s written letter Recollections of the last occurrences from the Life of Jesus Christ.
Publius Lentulus (ruler of Judea) wrote a letter to Roman emperor Tiberius (resides in a private library in England, found 1865 AD).
Pontius Pilate, Roman governor, wrote a report to Roman Caesar Tiberius in Jerusalem.
Celsus (170 AD)
Lucian of Samoset (160 AD)
Tacitus (70 AD)
Others included Africanus, Origen, Suetonius, Pliny the Younger, and Eusebius of Caesarea, and even the Syrian philosopher, Mara Bar-Serapion.

It really boils down to this, a quote by Basal Pascal, who sums it up beautifully..."In faith there is enough light for those who want to believe and enough shadows to blind those who don't." For believers the question is, "why do you want to believe?" for non believers, it is, "why do you not want to believe?" There are answers to those questions, gotta dig deep and soul search!
reply
2 ups, 2 replies
I appreciate your respectful reply.

If there is no evidence of an earlier census, we shouldn't assume there was one just to make the account in Luke fit with Matthew. It is my understanding (and I could be wrong) that the census in 6-7 CE had to be the first, because it was done as a result of Rome acquiring that territory. An earlier census wouldn't make sense if the Roman Empire didn't control that land.

Almost all of those historians you named were not contemporaneous to Jesus, and the ones that were don't mention him. The letter supposedly written by Pilate, and the one supposedly written by his wife are news to me and I will have to look into them further.

You said "for believers the question is 'why do you want to believe?' For non believers it is 'why do you not want to believe?'" It's not about me not wanting to believe in Christianity. It's that I don't believe the claims of Christianity are supported by evidence. Desire is irrelevant.
reply
1 up, 1 reply
Because couldn't anyone from any other religion just say the same thing? "You don't reject Hinduism/Islam/etc because of the lack of evidence. You reject them because you don't WANT to accept that they are true." I'm pretty sure you wouldn't accept that as a valid argument.
reply
0 ups
Good, thoughtful, and fair question. All one needs to do is look around them to see the complexities of life and nature...and the astronomical odds against all of it just coming together by chance, without a designer. Those are some pretty big odds, when you really have an understanding of just how complex the universe really is, and our relationship to it. Once a belief in God is attributed to such overwhelming "awesomeness" ...then it becomes a matter of which God, which truth claim; and the journey ensues. I did not grow up with any religion, really. So, I was a clean slate, so to speak...and have done comparative analysis of the truth claims of world religions. Christianity stands out singularly amongst all others...for it is the only religion whom's afterlife promise is not dependent on our works or good deeds. THIS has the ring of truth, and this is what sets Christianity apart from all others.
reply
0 ups
Evolutionary theory cannot prove, that God does not exist, any more than Christian apologetics proves, that God does exist. An agnostic is more honest in his truth claim than an atheist, for at least he has enough understanding, to admit this fact.

Even those who espouse no faith, demonstrate it everyday, in some form or fashion. I have faith that my car will start when I go to work in the morning, but I cannot really know for certain that it will. I have faith that the electric bill I put in the mail yesterday will reach the electric company, but I can't say for certain that it will. I don't believe the claims of atheism are supported by the evidence. So called evidences, are widely interpreted among scientists and scholars. It is impossible to prove God does not exist. So, when one chooses atheism, it does come down to desire...don't kid yourself.
reply
0 ups
reply
0 ups
I believe he was, but not everyone does.
reply
3 ups, 1 reply
reply
2 ups, 1 reply
There are many documents, manuscripts and fragments of the Bible, Old and New Testament, in addition to secular sources that speak of Christ’s resurrection. This contrasts with relatively few documents about some historical figures such as Julius Caesar. God has ensured that the historical record of Christ’s resurrection would be preserved accurately for us. Paul’s first letter to the congregation in Corinth can be dated to around 25 years after Jesus’ resurrection. The dates of these records are consistent with being able to speak authoritatively on Christ’s resurrection. In the Gospels, Acts and Paul’s letters, it is evident that many people were alive who could have disputed the facts provided by the New Testament writers if the details were wrong. Instead, there is agreement and consistency in what we are told. Former persecutors and detractors like Paul (previously Saul) did not dispute the records. Christians were willing to live under the constant threat of death—which would have been unthinkable unless they were convinced that Jesus was not a charlatan.
reply
0 ups, 1 reply
I hear you. I personally believe, that like all stories, over time people change the story slightly. Those slight changes, over time become exponential. Then, the final story you hear so long after the first recording and telling of the story is dradtically different than it was in the beginning.
reply
0 ups
I understand what your saying...There is alot of debate as to which bible versions best preserve the Word of God. Some passages may be affected by variant readings, but do not affect any major doctrine, and do not change the biblical message. We should focus on the amazing similarities of the texts, and their ability to communicate the gospel, rather than focusing on their dissimilarities, which are often trivial. God has preserved His Word through the ages. We may debate the wording in a few passages, but the fact remains, that the text is unanimously supported by all ancient manuscripts. The Dead Sea scrolls (including Old testament texts) which date back from 250 BCE-70CE were rediscovered in 1947. These scrolls have confirmed the accuracy of the copies (Masoretic text, Hebrew OT), written 1000 years later. We CAN be rest assured that we have the accurate, revealed words of God passed down to us.
Flip Settings

Created with the Imgflip Meme Generator

Show embed codes
IMAGE DESCRIPTION:
DO YOU BELIEVE IN THE EXISTENCE OF SOCRATES? ALEXANDER THE GREAT? JULIUS CAESAR? IF HISTORICITY IS ESTABLISHED BY WRITTEN RECORDS IN MULTIPLE COPIES THAT DATE ORIGINALLY FROM NEAR CONTEMPORANEOUS SOURCES, THERE IS FAR MORE PROOF FOR CHRIST'S EXISTENCE THAN FOR ANY OF THEIRS.
hotkeys: D = random, W = like, S = dislike, A = back