http://debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com/2015/06/for-fourth-time-jesus-fails-to-qualify.html
Quote"For more than half a century, the Oxford Classical Dictionary has been the unrivaled one-volume reference work on the Greco-Roman world. Whether one is interested in literature or art, philosophy or law, mythology or science, intimate details of daily life or broad cultural and historical trends, the OCD is the first place to turn for clear, authoritative information on all aspects of ancient culture.
Now comes the Fourth Edition of this redoubtable resource, thoroughly revised and updated, with numerous new entries and two new focus areas (on reception and anthropology). Here, in over six thousand entries ranging from long articles to brief identifications, readers can find information on virtually any topic of interest--athletics, bee-keeping, botany, magic, religious rites, postal service, slavery, navigation, and the reckoning of time. The Oxford Classical Dictionary profiles every major figure of Greece and Rome, from Homer and Virgil to Julius Caesar and Alexander the Great. Readers will find entries on mythological and legendary figures, on major cities, famous buildings, and important geographical landmarks, and on legal, rhetorical, literary, and political terms and concepts." See: Oxford University Press
QuoteUnder Josephus, Flavius, both the 1st (1948) and 2nd (1969) edition failed to mention any reference to Jesus ( note in 2nd, ed. , p.565), while a three page article on Jews (pp. 563- 565) also fails to reference either Jesus or the New Testament.
The 3rd. ed. continues the title: QuoteThe Oxford Classical Dictionary: The Ultimate Reference Work on the Classical World includes more than 6,200 entries, but again fails to provided any entry on Jesus nor has it any use for the New Testament as a historical record. Although the entry on Josephus is expanded in the newer editions, the Dictionary dismisses the Testimonium Flavianum account on Jesus as reliable history in just one sentence: “The famous testimonium to Jesus is partly or even wholly an interpolation.†(p. 798)
Likewise, there are no entries on Gospels, New Testament, nor does the Dictionary list a single reference to any Biblical book under its section: Abbreviations Used in the Present Work A. General B. Authors and Books in its 75 pages.
The Dictionary does have a entry on Christianity, but concludes its four page history summation on the development of the Christian religion this way:
“Can we be sure about the scale of that development? It is impossible to judge the size of the Christian population at any one time. Surviving reports are marred by hyperbole, ignorance, and convention. Archaeology and inscriptions are statistically haphazard and impervious to individual sentiment, particularly in the east Christians formed sizable minority and occasionally even a majority in the late 3rd cent.. The difficult question is why. Breeding and friendship must have played a large part in the expansion of Christianity â€" perhaps always larger than that of convincing oratory. What remains textually of Christian address was not necessarily disseminated broadly. We know little more about the reception of the Christian message than we do about that of any ancient document. With the advent of toleration, it is likely that expediency, laziness, and fear played as much a part then as they do now. Talk of ‘superstition’ is misleading. Features of religious life supposedly attractive to a superstitious mind had always been available in traditional cults. The change of allegiance demands more subtle explanations.†( p. 328)
In conclusion, while Christian apologists may find proof of Jesus as a historical figure in a few Classical authors, the professional Editors and Contributors of this long standing "Ultimate Reference Work on the Classical World" would strongly disagree!
This is damning, because the Oxford Classical Dictionary is considered an authoritative text.
Read the comments- one of the dissenters is John Dickson, a key Christian apologist.
I've noted this before; the advent of Jesus as savior is the single biggest event in history, bar none, if it is the truth. It makes no sense to think Jesus is the real living Messiah if his "advent" is at best a human who was deified as a savior or outright myth, as some claim. Sheer lack of corresponding evidence alone is damning, if Jesus was indeed the Messiah. God did a very poor job of presentation for an all knowing, all seeing entity.
BRAVO! :super:
I love you, Sol. stick around. :flowers:
:eek: :pidu: :syda: Well that was really unexpected, but I'm extremely glad you said that, I thought it was good riddance to get rid of me. :syda: :kiss: :biggrin2: I feel vindicated now, even though I agree I needed to clean up my act. You can't believe how good this makes me feel. Thanks old friend!
Quote from: stromboli on June 04, 2015, 03:21:46 PM
I love you, Sol. stick around. :flowers:
Well, I don't love you--I don't think I do. Well...............anyway, stick around. You are always interesting and entertaining. :)
Well, Strom, this was most unexpected. I love it! And leave it up to you to come up with posts like this! Excellent!
The next person that tries to tell me the Bible is an accurate historical account, I'm dropping this on them.
:flowers: :syda: :super:
Quote from: Solitary on June 04, 2015, 03:30:07 PM
Well that was really unexpected, but I'm extremely glad you said that, I thought it was good riddance to get rid of me.
You silly, nutjob.
QuoteI feel vindicated now, even though I agree I needed to clean up my act.
(https://edmontonslutwalk.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/blow-kiss-lipstick-red-favim-com-152038.jpg)
I read this book awhile ago... http://www.amazon.com/The-Christ-Conspiracy-Greatest-Story/dp/0932813747
I looked it a lot. Very detailed information.
http://www.truthbeknown.com/christ.htm
I haven't had time to peruse the site but I thought I would link it since it's directly related. But the author caught a lot of flack from the academic community for it. Tell me what you think
NPR interviewed some kind of Biblical authority who talked about the life of Jesus, and what he was like. When asked for his opinion on those who say there is no actual evidence for the existence of Jesus, he said the evidence for the actual existence of Jesus, be he the son of God or not, is compelling. He said most Biblical scholars believe an actual Jesus existed.
I'll guess that most Biblical scholars are theists, and most likely Christian. If that's true, then I would like make the unequivocal statement, "Most people who believe in Jesus, believe he actually existed." Well, Yahoo!
The guy NPR interviewed did not mention any other evidence for Jesus that I can remember, and he certainly did not mention the Oxford Classical Dictionary. Nor did he identify anyone from the opposing camp or explain their rationale. He treated that point of view as non-existent.
It was a rare bomb for NPR, although there are local affiliates who have their own shows and their own hosts, who sometimes drift off into areas that are pure speculation, rather than informational in nature. I'm not sure if this was from the National NPR studio, or not.
Quote from: wbuentello on June 08, 2015, 12:53:29 PM
I read this book awhile ago... http://www.amazon.com/The-Christ-Conspiracy-Greatest-Story/dp/0932813747
I looked it a lot. Very detailed information.
http://www.truthbeknown.com/christ.htm
I haven't had time to peruse the site but I thought I would link it since it's directly related. But the author caught a lot of flack from the academic community for it. Tell me what you think
Acharya S, is not well thought of for her academic skills even by those who agree with her that Jesus is a myth. right now the leading lights for the Jesus is myth movement is Richard Carrier, Robert M Price and Earl Doherty. Doherty had a good web site a few years ago, and is a good read. Price has many, many books on the subject (he is good in that he is an ex-minister) and Carrier's latest book is the most info packed of them all. But I'm sure there are more jesus is myth authors out there.
Quote from: Mike Cl on June 08, 2015, 02:09:46 PM
Acharya S, is not well thought of for her academic skills even by those who agree with her that Jesus is a myth. right now the leading lights for the Jesus is myth movement is Richard Carrier, Robert M Price and Earl Doherty. Doherty had a good web site a few years ago, and is a good read. Price has many, many books on the subject (he is good in that he is an ex-minister) and Carrier's latest book is the most info packed of them all. But I'm sure there are more jesus is myth authors out there.
Yeah I kinda gleaned that about her after I had read the book. It was the first time I came across the Jesus myth. I also didn't really take her book as a scholarly work, it didn't have the heavily researched and sourced "weight" to it. I nevertheless found it very informative from a cultural history stand point and I was introduced to a lot of the interesting parallels in the world's different Messiah myths. I also was unaware that this idea had gained any traction in the academic arena. One of the most interesting things I've learned is the conspicuous lack of mention of a historical Jesus character from the periods many prolific historians and chroniclers. Overall very compelling evidence
Quote from: wbuentello on June 08, 2015, 02:54:48 PM
Yeah I kinda gleaned that about her after I had read the book. It was the first time I came across the Jesus myth. I also didn't really take her book as a scholarly work, it didn't have the heavily researched and sourced "weight" to it. I nevertheless found it very informative from a cultural history stand point and I was introduced to a lot of the interesting parallels in the world's different Messiah myths. I also was unaware that this idea had gained any traction in the academic arena. One of the most interesting things I've learned is the conspicuous lack of mention of a historical Jesus character from the periods many prolific historians and chroniclers. Overall very compelling evidence
I ran across her at the beginning of my research about the Jesus Myth, as well. It was interesting but it left me wanting something more substantial. That is where Robert M. Price and doherty come in. And GA Wells. According to Carrier, there is no proof, either inside the bible or outside the bible. In fact, the lack of any mention or a historical Jesus outside the bible is covered in all the books I listed. It is remarkable that such a mover and shaker was not noticed by any contemporary historian. The lack of evidence, in this case, speaks volumes.
Quote from: Mike Cl on June 08, 2015, 05:24:08 PM
I ran across her at the beginning of my research about the Jesus Myth, as well. It was interesting but it left me wanting something more substantial. That is where Robert M. Price and doherty come in. And GA Wells. According to Carrier, there is no proof, either inside the bible or outside the bible. In fact, the lack of any mention or a historical Jesus outside the bible is covered in all the books I listed. It is remarkable that such a mover and shaker was not noticed by any contemporary historian. The lack of evidence, in this case, speaks volumes.
This is the more significant to me when you think of Jesus in the larger perspective. If in fact he were real and what he did was real, it would be the single greatest event in history, bar none. It is highly suspicious that god caused this to happen and left virtually no objective evidence of it. Kind of the icing on the cake imo.
Quote from: stromboli on June 08, 2015, 05:51:47 PM
This is the more significant to me when you think of Jesus in the larger perspective. If in fact he were real and what he did was real, it would be the single greatest event in history, bar none. It is highly suspicious that god caused this to happen and left virtually no objective evidence of it. Kind of the icing on the cake imo.
I don't remember the author's name but he started a quest to verify the 19 or so historians who were alive when Jesus was but failed to mention him. He failed in that quest--he found something like 117 historians who should known who he was and what he did--but failed to mention him at all. He wrote a book about it. That is amazing. Why did god make all those historians blind?? To me, just the fact that Philo failed to mention him is astounding!