Myth 1: The New Testament is an infallible witness to prove the historical existence of Jesus Christ.
Review: In fact the NT has a lot of contradictions, impossibilities and fallacies that are unlikely to present evidence "irrefutable" of the alleged existence of Jesus. Here are a few examples of contradictions in the NT, "in the Gospel of Luke says Jesus was born 9 years before the death of Herod, in contrast to the Gospel of Matthew says he was born only 2 years before the death of that KING in the genealogy of Jesus in Matthew says that Joseph's father Jacob, Luke tells us that change was Heli.Además both contradict each other in all names of ancestors of Jesus other than the names of David and Joseph, and contradicted in the number of generations as a gospel while 56 generations are counted in other are only 42, etc.
Myth 2: In the book "Testimonium Flavianum" the renowned Jewish historian Josephus mentions Jesus appears where it is recognized that it was the Christ, then this book is a solid historical evidence for the existence of Christ.
Review: Most scholars believe that little passage is only an interpolation made by a Christian scribe (possibly by Eusebius, Father of the Church) was taken long after the appearance Josephus' book, then that "testimony" lacks valor.Muy suspect that this fragment is falsely attributed to Josephus, since it appears as Josephus ... Christian!, it is known that he was always Pharisee and never renounced his sect (which was harshly criticized by Jesus in the NT). But if we assume, without historical basis, the alleged "conversion" of Josephus to Christianity, how is it possible that he dedicates his book just a few lines, to make matters worse, they have no relation to the rest of the text? Why not devoted an entire book to your new messiah if both believed in him?.
Myth 3: The early persecution of Christians by Nero and other Roman emperors of the century, show that the doctrine of Jesus was widely known soon after his death.
Review: Although books and movies that show us a Nero persecutor of Christians, there is no historical evidence has been rigorously pursued by a Christian ... 180 DC (second century). The first reference to the alleged persecution of Christians by Nero was freshly made in 170 AD by the Bishop of Sardis and never antes.Por other hand, it is curious that in 64 AD, Nero's time, many Christians were slaughtered in just Rome 30 years after the death of Jesus in an age where communications between different geographical areas were not characterized precisely by being quick and speedy.
Myth 4: References to the Christians by the heathen Pliny the Younger and Tacitus are evidence of the historicity of Jesus.
Review: First, these historians say nothing testable and new about the character Jesus, only limited mention the Christian movement and spread, uncritically, the same rumor that Christians shouted on ajusticiamento of Second Cristo.En The experts tell us that the passage of Pliny the younger was a further distortion of a quote about the Essenes, not Christians, and the passage of Tacitus only ... was known in the fifteenth century, that is, 1500 years after it was supposedly written.
Myth 5: The holy places of Christianity, the relics and the simple fact that there are icons that represent the body of Jesus are material evidence of their existence.
Review: With respect to sacred places, experts tell us that these were considered as such (and called as they appear in the NT) only from ... IV.Con century to the relics, it is known that 90 % of them are fakes and the rest should be the reasonable suspicion of forgery. For example, the number of chips supposed relics of the cross on which Jesus was supposedly crucified is so great that could be dozens of crosses and even a wooden ship ... (sic). And finally, regarding the alleged physical representation "reliable" of Jesus to the same Catholic Encyclopedia tells us that there is no reliable picture Jesus ... unless, of course, that we create these representations of Jesus "Aryan" blond hair and blue eyes of some churches (with a whiff of anti-Semitism) that do not correspond much to the Jewish character of Middle Eastern or Semitic that is attributed to Jesus in the NT.
0 comments:
Post a Comment