Posted by Harry K on 06/09/06 14:36

Brian Cryer wrote:
> "Harry K" <turnkey4099@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1149779459.670144.80070@f6g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> > Brian Cryer wrote:
> <snip>
> > > Secondly, regardless of whether the 13th century crusaders got lost
> > > (they
> > > might have done for all I know they seem to have been the "yobs" of
> > > their
> > > time, just our for a fight), there has never been any dispute about
> > > whether
> > > Nazareth existed or where it is. Ditto, there is no doubt that Jesus (of
> > > the
> > > Bible) existed, live a while, died on the cross and rose from the dead -
> > > or
> > > as put in John 3:16 [KJV] "For God so loved the world, that he gave is
> > > only
> > > begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but
> > > have
> > > everlasting life."
> >
> > Would you care to try to prove that he existed? No, no, you can't use
> > the bible to do it and that is the only place he is referred to. All
> > other references only trace back to the bible. One would think that
> > with all the uproar he supposedly caused there would be at least a few
> > refences to him in documents from that time.
>
> Even without the Bible there are many documented historical records clearly
> demonstrating the existence of Jesus. You should try googling before you try
> posting.
>
> I googled on "historical records of jesus" (without the quotes). The first
> three hits (as far as I've looked) were:
> www.scripturessay.com/cev1.html

Well I plowed through this one and it is just as I expected. In every
contemporary case, all supposed references to him are based on assuming
he existed to begin with, no direct references by name. e.g. King of
the Jews, not Jesus or variations thereof the assumption was that
King... meant Jesus - poor scholarship.

All references to Christus or variations that I had the stomach enough
to read far enough (quite a ways) appear to be after his supposed death
and from Roman references in Rome. Not surprising that there would be
references to Christians after the sect arose. It does not go to
proving he ever existed.

Sorry those references to him are a bunch of assumptions piled on
wishful thinking.

I won't bother with the other two as I can see by teh url they are more
religious writings of the same ilk.

Harry K


> http://www.missiontoamerica.com/history.html
> http://www.sonic.net/sentinel/naij3.html
> its tempting to provide you with a summary, but I'll let you read them for
> yourself.
> --
> Brian Cryer
> www.cryer.co.uk/brian

[Back to original message]