Quote
Probably less than one-one millionth of the Roman Empire's documents have survived antiquity
Very true. Those that did usually were preserved by the Church because they gave affirmation to the Church. Since Christians had strongly infiltrated the Roman civil service by the middle to late part of the 2nd century, they would have had access to all those records and undoubtedly would have secured this most holy document, for verification of their god’s existence if nothing else.
Quote
Records like those from a backwater province like Judea were probably discarded anyway after a certain number of years like so many U.S. military records we are both familiar with.
Actually during the 1st and 2nd century CE Judea was not exactly a backwater of the Empire. It was the “thorn in the side” of the Empire, requiring constant political and military monitoring. The constant riots and rebellions of the Jews made a strong troop presence necessary in that area for nearly a century. As with our military and civil law today, records would probably have a “shelf-life” where unimportant trivia such as how many pilum were issued to XI Claudia legion during fiscal year DCCIV would be disposed of within 2 to 3 years and where really important documents and data would remain in the archives forever (or the destruction of Rome). This is the way military and civil archives work now, I can guarantee you that there are records and data from the War of 1812, the Civil War, etc still on file in military archives in the Pentagon. I would imagine that Death Warrants would be of great importance, especially those coming in from a hot spot such as Judea and would warrant a long shelf-life, long enough for Christian civil servants to acquire that one special warrant. The fact that this warrant doesn’t seem to exist (it would be one of the holiest, and only, relic of Jesus that ever existed), I say absence of evidence is evidence of absence.
Quote
it is extremely odd that you so steadfastedly maintain this Jesus never existed despite the numerous accounts to the contrary
Name one contemporary mention of Jesus.
Quote
Ancient man was just as sophisticated, and wary of fraud as modern man.
Yes, the educated upper-class was, but the uneducated, unwashed masses were a hotbed of ignorance, willing following any and all charlatans unquestioningly, just as the uneducated and gullible of today believe in many strange things (again I point to some of the other forums here). Unlike our educated and upper classes, those of the ancients did not see it their responsibility to open the eyes of the masses. In fact it probably was a good thing for them, as these charlatans kept the ignorant entertained and ignorant of the true misery of their existence and less likely to rebel.
Quote
Wouldn't you be sceptical of following a new religion if there was no proof its founder ever existed?
As an educated person, yes I would; but as a member of the uneducated gullible masses, I wouldn’t give it a thought….again look at the proliferation of weird cults during our present time period, and we are supposed to have universal education.
Quote
Christianity could not have gotten anywhere if its followers could not prove Jesus really lived.
Why would that be, look at all the modern cults that exist without any proof of anything….Did Applewhite, of Heaven’s Gate fame, have any proof of the lurking aliens or Joe Smith have any proof of ancient Jews in America? The gullible will flock to the unusual and absurd and if enough of them do, for long enough – voila! A new religion!
Quote
To my knowledge the Jews never questioned Jesus existence (for how could they since they caused his death)
They wouldn’t have had reason to worry about a miniscule cult hanging on their coat tails. Then when it was too late long after the destruction of the temple and its records in 70 CE, when the miniscule cult started attracting gentile converts and growing in strength and influence, they would have no proof of his non-existence. Strangely, Justus of Tiberia (Tiberia being very close to Capernaum which Jesus supposedly often visited makes no mention of him, even though he was a contemporary of Jesus! Philon of Alexandria, another contemporary of Jesus, was a famous scholar of the Old Testament and had deep knowledge of the Jewish cults of his time makes no mention of Jesus or a cult following him in any of his texts. It would seem that if a man of Jesus supposed statue ran around Palestine working supposed wondrous miracles, these two very imminent scholars would have at least mentioned him, especially the expert on Jewish sects and cults. Most scholars accept that the Romans executed Jesus as a rebel, not for religious reasons, the Jews actually had nothing to do with it...the scenes in the gospel have no backing and are probably like the rest of the gospels, fiction only.
Quote
It is probable Mithras was dead for a century or more before he became the object of a new religion
Mithra is a very old Indo-European God, known under various incarnations among the diverse descendents of the Indo-Europeans, usually with a name similar to Mithra or Mitra. The Mithra we know was the tribal God of the Mittanni of the Russian steppes, who entered Iran (Persia) and India around 2000 – 1500 BCE. The first written mention of Mithra was in 1375 BCE on a treaty between the Mittanni (who swore on Mithra) and the Hittites (who swore on the apparently nameless Sun God). In the Zoroastrian reformation/restructuring of the 7th Century BCE, Mithra was demoted to a Amentas Spenta (bounteous immortal), but was acknowledged by Ahura Mazda as being "as worthy of worship as myself." Mithra was acknowledged as the son of Ahura Mazda and became the savior god of the Persian religion by 4th century BCE. With a pedigree that far back and a varied career, it is doubt full that Mithra ever really existed. He did however serve as the template in constructing the Christ
Quote
But Jesus became the object of a new religion only only weeks and months after his death, when there were thousands of witnesses to his life. Give it a break
But Jesus became the object of a new religion only only weeks and months after his death, when there were thousands of witnesses to his life. Give it a break
Quote
In some ways you are being as ridiculous
No, I just refuse to accept something on faith, if it can’t be verified by multiple contemporary sources (what a good historian wants), I do not accept it as anything more that a possibility.
Quote
Some things are just too obvious and cannot be denied.
With no evidence, I deny them.
That was sweet! I believe they are three separate being, God, Jesus, Holy Spirit. 
Sign In
Register
Help
Board Index
Top
MultiQuote