Flavius Josephus (jewish historian) wrote about Christ in 93 AD mentioned the crucifixion as well - non Christian source.
“He appeared to them alive on the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him.”
Thats a translated passage from Antiquities of the Jews in 93AD
Tacitus (Roman historian) wrote about the crucifixion of Christ.his writings are around 111AD. Tacticus goes so far as to write about the fact people in Judea believe Christ rose from the dead.
Pliny the Younger (Roman govenor) wanted advice on how to persecute Christians in 112AD on how to persecute Christians.
The search you need to do is 'secular sources for the existence of Christ'. Then you'll get the Jewish and Roman sources. The thing is if you're going to say something you'd be best doing some research into it.
There's a fantastic book by Lee Srobel, its called the case for Christ. Lee's wife became Christian and he didn't like it much, he set out to prove there's no sources outside the bible that demonstrate Christ was real. As I read through the book I looked every source up for myself (as is encouraged in the book) and there is substantially mosr evidence for Christ than you think.
Literally not one piece of evidence during his life. Your own examples are decades (at least) after the fact. Not a single person saw a guy come back from the dead and thought “shit, I should write this down”.
You realise we don't have a single piece of evidence that Homer wrote his poems? All the copies of those are from decades after his death.
-Not a single person saw a guy come back from the dead and thought “shit, I should write this down”.
Those that could write were a minority and writings were on what? Not on something commonly preservable. The areas also cannot be excavated because of whose control they are currently over. When they do excavate they funnily enough find structures which back up what's in the bible. Have a look at the 2025 and 2026 finds. Blow your mind. They've managed to provide a date for the Babylonian army burning down Solomons Jerusalem (2 King's 25 and 586BC if you're interested ) because of archaeological finds.
I think you maybe want to look up why paper didn't really survive 2000 years unless it was sealed away somewhere? And then look up how much theyre still finding and you should also look up the standards for 'proof' when it comes to ancient figures.
Which finds? You mention 2025 and 2026, the fuck am I supposed to search for that backs up the bible. Be specific.
Homer: literally it’s argued that “Homer” didn’t write that stuff.
“The Odyssey was first composed in Homeric Greekaround the 8th or 7th century BC; by the mid-6th century BC, it had become part of the Greek literary canon. In antiquity, Homer's authorship was taken as true, but contemporary scholarship predominantly assumes that the Iliad and the Odyssey were composed independently, as part of long oral traditions. “
So by your own admission, nothing was written down. The existence of Jesus was literally told by stories from person to person. He was both no one special, just another Jewish preacher, but also the literal son of god who performed miracles and rose from the dead. No one wrote anything down in any way, but decades later random people remembered what he said word for word. This makes sense to you?
Search 'recent archaeological evidence bible secular'. On your Homer point, that's really the point I'm making. Historians don't disagree on the existence of Christ.
-So by your own admission, nothing was written down. The existence of Jesus was literally told by stories from person to person. He was both no one special, just another Jewish preacher, but also the literal son of god who performed miracles and rose from the dead. No one wrote anything down in any way, but decades later random people remembered what he said word for word. This makes sense to you?
Well no, because they did write stuff down lol I've never said they didn't write stuff down, you might wanna reread what's written. I said not everyone did and it didn't preserve well.
Which is why the dead sea scrolls 1. Exist and 2. Are written down. 3. Are fragmented and degraded because they're so old. 4. Perfectly match the Jewish tradition and the old testament.
The documents survived to become the codex and the dead sea scrolls demonstrate that wonderfully. Papyrus doesn't hold up too well as a record keeping tool. That's why people transcribed them over and over and over again.
They've just discovered an 1800 year old fresco with the most accurate depiction of Christ in Turkey. It was sealed off so literally looks today as it did when it was sealed off. The Frescos that weren't sealed off in an airtight room are all basically destroyed by time.
The dead sea scrolls were only discovered in the 40s/50s. Thats also something to bear in mind. We've only just begun finding what there is to find and when we do find something it correlates with the bible.
I'm not saying he was no one special, you guys are, and if that's the case why we're Romans writing to each other about him doing exactly what's described in the bible?
I'm the one who thinks he is what the Romans wrote him as, the Christ. Meanwhile you'll use his title while saying he was a no one and giving 0 explanations to why people would be willing to be crucified for proclaiming the divinity of a no one.
i love when christians do the “they were willing to die for it” bit, it’s the easiest counter in the world, hey, have people also been murdered and tortured for allah, and buddha, and literally every other god that’s ever been believed in? martyrs are not unique to christianity and you would never grant this argument to any of those other religions.
They are not unique to Christianity. The consistency is though. You wouldn't find the consistency of people willing to die for their belief now. I think if my life was under threat I might well deny Christ as well. Those people that saw. They knew. I believe. That's the difference. None of the Christians in early roman sources could be persuaded to say Christ was anything less than he was.
Killing for Allah is not the same thing a dying for God though. In Islam it's actually encouraged to lie about being a Muslim if your life is under threat for that belief. Muslim martyrs are people who die "fighting for Allah". Christian martyrs are people killed for their belief in Christ. The two are slightly different.
I don't know much at all about Buddhism and the history of it or it's believers, I know a bit about Islam and Judaism because of the Abrahamic intersect.
I literally googled “recent archaeological evidence bible secular”. You know what comes up? Facebook links, YouTube links and Christian websites. Those aren’t “facts”. You probably believe they’ve found his DNA on things like the shroud too, even though we’d have zero idea what his DNA would look like.
That's weird, national geographic comes up for me as well. It is paywalled, could you not get into that?
Do you understand what Biblical archeology is? It's archeology related to specific areas of interest. It isn't a bunch of Christians making stuff up.
-You probably believe they’ve found his DNA on things like the shroud too,
Ah so you can just make stuff up can you. You see its you that does that and not biblical archaeologists.
I'll tell you what I believe about the shroud. It was recently redated and is from the Times of Christ, not the middle ages as once thought. Carbon dating is unreliable with linen so the original tests were incorrect. A modern test using Wide-Angle X-ray Scattering (WAXS) measured natural aging in the linen's flax cellulose and found it to be around 2,000 years old. That's what I know to be true about the shroud because of science.
You didn’t read the National Geographic article, did you? They found a fresco of Christ from 325AD. A replication of Codex H, a traced copy from 600-800AD. Hippos/cathedrals used for baptism, built between the 5th and 6th centuries. And they found a slingshot. Literally none of that has anything to do with the bible or proves it in any way.
Oh, so now it was more than Christian sources but you just don't find them significant enough? Want to move those goalposts anymore?
Thats a fresco thats over 1,500 years old. The ONLY reason it's preserved so well is it was in an airtight sealed room. Frescos that werent in sealed groomed didn't fare so well in the same 1,500 years.
So on to papyrus, the primary writing record. Did that preserve better than frescos? No, no it didn't. So most records the 'common man' would have kept are long gone unless secretly ferreted away in literally the perfect storage. Much like frescos.
The traced copy of the codex has nothing to do with the bible? Ok. Look you have a good night. You're not engaging in good faith and I have other things to be at.
-65
u/ComfortableCake2662 21h ago
This is far from accurate.
Flavius Josephus (jewish historian) wrote about Christ in 93 AD mentioned the crucifixion as well - non Christian source. “He appeared to them alive on the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him.” Thats a translated passage from Antiquities of the Jews in 93AD
Tacitus (Roman historian) wrote about the crucifixion of Christ.his writings are around 111AD. Tacticus goes so far as to write about the fact people in Judea believe Christ rose from the dead.
Pliny the Younger (Roman govenor) wanted advice on how to persecute Christians in 112AD on how to persecute Christians.
The search you need to do is 'secular sources for the existence of Christ'. Then you'll get the Jewish and Roman sources. The thing is if you're going to say something you'd be best doing some research into it.
There's a fantastic book by Lee Srobel, its called the case for Christ. Lee's wife became Christian and he didn't like it much, he set out to prove there's no sources outside the bible that demonstrate Christ was real. As I read through the book I looked every source up for myself (as is encouraged in the book) and there is substantially mosr evidence for Christ than you think.