Do Roman records prove Jesus' existence was a hoax?

[Pengwinja]

what is up with all these years old threads suddenly popping back up?! Surely we should allow them to rest, and fade into obscurity... BrainBomb, this is madness!

Madness? THIS. IS. WEBDIP FORUM POSTS®.

[MajorMitchell]

I preface this post with the qualification that I have scanned four pages of posts so if it is mentioned already I missed it..
I doubt that it has been mentioned... So..

I am bloody disappointed in you whipper-snappers and old supposedly sage contributors on the previous four pages of this thread for the appalling lack.of clarity with your collective knowledge of Roman History.at the time Jesus lived amongst mortal breathing homo sapiens in Judea.

Jesus was born in the reign of the Emperor Augustus and Jesus was crucified in the reign of the Emperor Tiberius.

The best authority is the encoded biography of the Emperor Claudius who was the same age as Herod who was sent to Rome as a child and lived with Claudius, they shared tutors, were life long friends, this Herod became King Herod.

Claudius was an intelligent, highly literate scholar, multi linguist, when he was Emperor Claudius, he wrote his own biography in code and hid it well, it was hidden for about 1,700 years

As Emperor, the access to information that Claudius had is enviable.
Claudius had Herod as one source of information, access to records from the Governors of Judea, including Pontius Pilate.

Claudius describes Jesus using a different name, a version of Joshua as I recall.
Confirms that Jesus existed and was a dissident prophet & relates a Synopsis of the religious strife etc.

Claudius also describes the identity of the father of Jesus as a Greek mercenary soldier serving with the Roman Army in Judea.

I have described this before in forum threads and those posts have been read by several contributors to this thread... who have failed to recall the information.

Dare I suggest that a few Christians amongst those who have read my previous posts of this information... Crazy Anglican being notable ...
Do not recall this information because they dislike having Claudius nominate.a father for Jesus who is doctrinally difficult to accept?

Can't cherry pick with what Claudius tells us, take the good bit. "Claudius confirms Jesus lived and other helpful things, his crucifixion etc
And refuse to accept the doctrinally indigestible paternity, a Greek mercenary serving with Roman Army in Judea

Read the two novels that are the English translation of the biography of Emperor Claudius by Robert Graves
I Claudius
Claudius the God

[Napple]

I preface this post with the qualification that I have scanned four pages of posts so if it is mentioned already I missed it..
I doubt that it has been mentioned... So..

I am bloody disappointed in you whipper-snappers and old supposedly sage contributors on the previous four pages of this thread for the appalling lack.of clarity with your collective knowledge of Roman History.at the time Jesus lived amongst mortal breathing homo sapiens in Judea.

Jesus was born in the reign of the Emperor Augustus and Jesus was crucified in the reign of the Emperor Tiberius.

The best authority is the encoded biography of the Emperor Claudius who was the same age as Herod who was sent to Rome as a child and lived with Claudius, they shared tutors, were life long friends, this Herod became King Herod.

Claudius was an intelligent, highly literate scholar, multi linguist, when he was Emperor Claudius, he wrote his own biography in code and hid it well, it was hidden for about 1,700 years

As Emperor, the access to information that Claudius had is enviable.
Claudius had Herod as one source of information, access to records from the Governors of Judea, including Pontius Pilate.

Claudius describes Jesus using a different name, a version of Joshua as I recall.
Confirms that Jesus existed and was a dissident prophet & relates a Synopsis of the religious strife etc.

Claudius also describes the identity of the father of Jesus as a Greek mercenary soldier serving with the Roman Army in Judea.

I have described this before in forum threads and those posts have been read by several contributors to this thread... who have failed to recall the information.

Dare I suggest that a few Christians amongst those who have read my previous posts of this information... Crazy Anglican being notable ...
Do not recall this information because they dislike having Claudius nominate.a father for Jesus who is doctrinally difficult to accept?

Can't cherry pick with what Claudius tells us, take the good bit. "Claudius confirms Jesus lived and other helpful things, his crucifixion etc
And refuse to accept the doctrinally indigestible paternity, a Greek mercenary serving with Roman Army in Judea

Read the two novels that are the English translation of the biography of Emperor Claudius by Robert Graves
I Claudius
Claudius the God

This is the first I have heard of Claudius' records. I will have to seek them out and read them. That said, thanks to other sources already mentioned in the recent thread "why is there no roman record of Jesus execution," such as Tacitus, one could reject Claudius' records due to the inconsistency of Jesus' father and still have grounds beyond the Bible to believe in Jesus' existence. You could make the argument that this would be another form of cherry-picking, and that is another discussion, but I agree with the logic that you can't pick and choose what you like from one specific source. But you can take that source away and the historicity of Jesus isn't any worse off.

[Crazy Anglican]

There is pretty good evidence of Jesus's resurrection right here since not even a thread written about Him will die.

[Spartaculous]

The best authority is the encoded biography of the Emperor Claudius who was the same age as Herod who was sent to Rome as a child and lived with Claudius, they shared tutors, were life long friends, this Herod became King Herod.

For anyone wondering (since there were many Herods), this appears to be Herod Agrippa (also known as Herod Agrippa I), who appears in the Bible in Acts 12 (with a notable death). He is different from the many Herods who appear in the (canonical) Gospels.

[CaptainFritz28]

Not the baby killing King Herod, the worm eaten King Herod.

[MajorMitchell]

Well done Spartaculous, you are correct about Herod Agrippa and his notable death, congratulations.
2nd place on the podium goes to Napple, a relative newcomer to our Webdiplomacy community, probably an enthusiastic young whipper-snapper given Napple's open minded response and determination to make further inquiries.

Please do get copies of those two novels Napple, when you read about the author Robert Graves academic qualifications and the history of the encrypted biography of Claudius then you might understand why I rate Claudius as a most reliable source.
Third place for your dearest Crazy Anglican for a truth that in my opinion, you happily interpret in subjective self serving way and ignore the inconvenient probable identity of the father of Jesus issue, yet again????

[Wattsthematter]

Major Mitchell, the concept of Jesus having a father is nothing new to Christians. The gospels state that Jesus was conceived of only Mary, while the New Testament states that Joseph was his father. Some argue he was a "step father" while others believe he did indeed impregnate Mary. Regardless of how this troubling retcon is explained, it's important to note that dual/conflicting stories of conception were not rare at this time, especially in roman biographies. Alexander The Great is a good example of this.

My point is... I don't think your point is as troublesome as you make it out to be to a Christian that has studied the gospels and is familiar with greco-roman accounts.

[Crazy Anglican]

I do like historical fiction. I'll probably read the novels. I'm not sure what you're asserting though, so I haven't responded directly.

[MajorMitchell]

Crazy Anglican you are acting like a cork brained clown by dismissing the work.of Robert Graves in such a disrespectful manner.
The man has impressive academic qualifications, far superior to any that YOU (and I ).might have.

Go fuck yourself for your impudent ignorant slur of a highly respected man.
You're damn lucky you live in the Northern hemisphere, I'd give you a taste of leather with a stock whip.if I had the opportunity

[Wattsthematter]

Crazy Anglican you are acting like a cork brained clown by dismissing the work.of Robert Graves in such a disrespectful manner.
The man has impressive academic qualifications, far superior to any that YOU (and I ).might have.

Go fuck yourself for your impudent ignorant slur of a highly respected man.
You're damn lucky you live in the Northern hemisphere, I'd give you a taste of leather with a stock whip.if I had the opportunity

Yikes

[Napple]

How did we go from reviving a four-year-old theology/history thread to roleplaying as African (or maybe Australian) slavers?

[Crazy Anglican]

Crazy Anglican you are acting like a cork brained clown by dismissing the work.of Robert Graves in such a disrespectful manner.
The man has impressive academic qualifications, far superior to any that YOU (and I ).might have.

Go fuck yourself for your impudent ignorant slur of a highly respected man.
You're damn lucky you live in the Northern hemisphere, I'd give you a taste of leather with a stock whip.if I had the opportunity

No, no. This is the argument clinic. I think you'll find that abuse is down the hallway to your left.

[Esquire Bertissimmo]

I'm so confused by MM's outburst. I, Claudius and King Jesus were both written as historical fiction. Graves obviously knew a lot about the period, but he himself did not claim that these books represent historical facts.

[CaptainFritz28]

I can only conclude that MM's most recent post was, in fact, satire.

[Wattsthematter]

I can only conclude that MM's most recent post was, in fact, satire.

Hopefully the D riding of Robert Graves is too

[Crazy Anglican]

I can only conclude that MM's most recent post was, in fact, satire.

Hopefully the D riding of Robert Graves is too

I don't think anyone was deriding the author. When I looked the novels up, the review I saw classified them as historical fiction; and they seemed interesting. I'll probably read them.

[Napple]

I don’t think that’s the kind of riding he was talking about…

[JustAGuyNamedWill]

I can only conclude that MM's most recent post was, in fact, satire.

Hopefully the D riding of Robert Graves is too

I don't think anyone was deriding the author. When I looked the novels up, the review I saw classified them as historical fiction; and they seemed interesting. I'll probably read them.

Yes… ‘deriding’… lets go with that