Markus6 said:
Jesus didn't hang around with historians. He was friends with (probably illiterate) fishermen, tax collectors (hiss boo) and prostitutes. The educated parts of society (scribes and pharisees) weren't his biggest fans.Passed down by mouth?? Now forty years to Mark's gospel I can just about see being passed down one generation. But 15 years is not enough time for it to be passed down by word of mouth. They weren't living that long, but I'm sure a few survived to 15. I think it's fair to say there would by eye witnesses still alive as Paul was writing the first epistles.
We're talking historical proof here, not scientific. Prove conclusively that Alexander the Great existed....
Why would the early church want to make up stories about Jesus? Christians weren't on the good side of the Romans initially. And if it was made up why are there conflicting accounts?
Who he hung around with doesn't matter much. We're talking about a man described as being famous across that land. Known by all when he entered into Jerusalem. All the Romans had knowledge of who he was. Again, the reason it was dangerous for him to go into Jerusalem was that people were quite aware of who he was.
1st century...what was the avg lifespan? I don't know and I'm too lazy to go find it at the moment, but I'd have to guess around...45ish? Obviously I'm not saying these tales were passed gen to gen by that time. I'm talking village to village...city to city. I can only assume this is how his fame grew so far in the first place. How did Romans know of him when he entered Jerusalem? No writings about him, and he hadn't been there previously resurrecting people or anything. Word of mouth.
The proof I'm wondering about doesn't need to be scientific, far from it. I'd accept almost anything outside of religious texts. Nothing has to be conclusive, I'm just wondering why there's nothing. Alexander had scores of historians both far and wide that talked about his conquests...those who lived during his time. Jesus has nothing. We're very leniant about "proof" when it comes to ancient times, Jesus (the man) gets the same treatment from me at least. But it's not there. And we're only talking historical here, so proof of his divinity isn't even on my mind if he actually did exist. I see no reason to actually believe he did.
The "church" wouldn't exist without people believing the man did. They held power, wealth, influence... For all of that to happen, they needed Jesus to have existed. Pretty decent motive if you ask me. Even the story of Jesus tells us about how greedy the Jewish hiearchy was at the time. Why it would be so hard to believe the same thing about the early Christians is beyond me...they were men, just like any other.
Conflicting accounts would be more likely to prove my point. If we look back at some of the stories handed down through time, they tend to start varying greatly, perhaps even conflicting with one another. Take a look at US holidays, and there actual origins, for instance...there's a pretty decent roundup of examples.
Threatened? All you've said in this thread is ideological speculation. The power and popularity of Jesus' ministries, the steadfastness of Christianity even through Roman persecution, and the great number of witnesses all speak to the historical validity of Jesus' life.
I've been away for five days. I will be leaving again shortly.
