Quote:
|
Originally Posted by randilover
http://www.carm.org/bible/extrabiblical_accounts.htm
Check out this link. Some of them have disclaimers on them, but from the studies I’ve done, I believe these are generally accepted but both Christian and non-Christian. Not all reference the crucifixion, but some do.
Yes it is. It’s usually only fringe scholars who try to make the case against Christian history. (I’m talking NT here.) The OT obviously is a bit tougher due to it’s age, but I don’t know of anyone that really discounts it’s historical accuracy. Again, you’d have to treat it the way you do science. If it has not been disproved you can’t say it’s not true just because it’s content is disagreeable.
|
Not surpringly, things aren't as cut and dry as you'd have us believe. The sources you quotes are NOT generally accepted by both Christians and non-Christians. In fact, all of the sources quoted on your link fall into one of these categories; secondary source, debated source, a mention of Christ, not a confirmation of his existiance, or fiction.
Flavius Josephus, reputation as an historian itself is questioned. The authenticity of his reference to Jesus has been the subject of debate since the 17
th century.
Tacitus sources for the Annals were secondary souces, and the accuracy of the Annals is questioned, unlike they are for his Histories.
Thallus-The website’s reference to Thallus is incorrect (see Wikipedia). The next earliest reference to Thallus’ reference to the supposed darkness is in the 9
th Century. From Wikipedia: However, no other author who mentions Thallus before Syncellus makes any mention of Thallus' supposed reference to the darkness. One would expect Christians to make a great deal of such a reference on the part of a well-known chronographer and historian if it supported Christian belief. Africanus may here be in error or Thallus may have only put forth the idea that the darkness that Christians claimed occurred at the death of Jesus was a normal eclipse of the Sun, perhaps referring to the eclipse of the Sun that occurred in AD
29.
Pliny the Younger – Not sure what that quote is supposed to verify. It is simply a letter to the Emperor what he is supposed to do about Christians, and how to judge them. It simply states that the believers sing a hymn to Christ, it does nothing to verify Christ was alive.
The Talmud- From Wikipedia “The
Talmud is a record of
rabbinic discussions on
Jewish law,
Jewish ethics, customs, legends and stories, which Jewish tradition considers authoritative.” Wikipedia states there are many different scolarly opinions of the historical accuracy of the Talmud.
Lucian – The source quoted is a satire written by Lucian. It is not a historical document. Lucian was not a historian, and was born 120 AD, hardly a first hand source.
If these are the best sources you have, it’s hardly convincing. You expect me to accept the historical accuracy of Jesus based on these sources. Meanwhile, I could provide you with numerous peer reviewed scientific documents, and you’d find fault.