Hamas legalizes Crucifixion

[Avinash_Tyagi]

Kasz216 said:

Avinash_Tyagi said:

Kasz216 said:

Avinash_Tyagi said:

Kasz216 said:

Avinash_Tyagi said:

 

 

 No actually there isn't, in fact there is the Jesus myth hypothesis, so it has not passed the test of historical critiscism or certinty as there are those who hypothesize that the stories are not real

 

 

Those who hypothisize this are frauds.

Why else would the Romans... before they went Chrstian mind you.  Refrence that they crucified him after the fact if they didn't?

Actually there isn't many secular records of Jesus's crucifixtion, and the ones that do exist, like Tacitus, was written decades later

 

 

Yeah.  That's my point.  Decades later... while they still were pagans... the Romans refrence crucifying jesus.

Why would they do this?  When they have more to gain from denying his existence?

No doubt there is a record of jesus' execution, but it's no different then the record of the execution of a theif or another prophet.

It wasn't until decades later that Jesus became anything to write about in the non religious world.

Once Chrsitanity was proven it was here to stay and not just another crazy Jewish sect gone in a few months....

THEN we get histroical refrences of Romans talking about how they crucified jesus.

If they didn't, it would  make much more sense to deny he never existed since it would rob the religion of it's power.

 

See you think that i'm saying its some vast conspiracy, not at all, i'm saying it was a legend that was formed around stories, back then there was no tlephone, or newspaper, and no internent, and most couldn't read or write, rumors and stories were passed by word of motuh and like any game of telephone will show you each step they get changed and embellished.   The fact is none of that supports that there was a real jesus, only that a legend of jesus existed, like the legends of the greek/roman gods

So.  Your saying the romans... made up the fact they crucified jesus to go along with the religion they were activly trying to wipe out?

 

 

 

 Did I say that the romans made up the story?  where did I say that?

 

I said that The writings of the crucifixtion, even those of the Romans, were done decades after his suppsed death, plenty of time for any stories to become legend, to become embellished and changed, you argue that because some romans wrote about a guy who was crucified decades earlier, that he must have been real, not at all, what i'm saying is that unless there is some proof that any of these roman writers actually were there, then all they are writing is second hand accounts as well.

 

You yourself admit that it was a punishement that was carried out a lot of times in that period, so there were plenty of stories of people who had been crucified floating around at the time, some of those stories may have even been fake, just rumors, yet still could have been tunred into legend.

 

My point is, unless you have a first hand account of the events, some sort of documentation of the event as it was happening, you have no evidence, beyond story.