English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Lucian (circa 120-after 180) mentions Jesus


Lucian, (175 CE), refers to "the man who was crucified in Palestine because he introduced this new cult into the world." Regardless of the fact that this is NOT AN EYEWITNESS ACCOUNT BUT WRITTEN 120 YEARS AFTER THE SUPPOSED DEATH OF JESUS, nowhere in any of his writings does Lucian mention the man's name, or the cult he brought into the world. This is a SPECIAL PLEADING argument by Christians, we are too ASSUME he is talking

For more:

http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/rook_hawkins/the_jesus_mythicist_campaign/2889

Do you have any other articles on mythism? if so post a link.

2007-07-03 13:10:30 · 43 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

43 answers

While I appreciate your research and enthusiasm, the roman writers Tactitus, Suetonius, and Flavius Josephus, all mention accounts of Jesus during the time period that he would have lived. Of the strange cult that many of the writers of the time would have mentioned, was probably led by misunderstanding of the early church, which many people believed to be cannibalistic (eating the body and blood of your savior) and so wide spread fear of this growing and dangerous cult became common in the Roman Empire, which in part, along with Christians unwillingness to accept their God into the Parthenon's of other Greek gods led to the wide spread fear and persecution of Christians. So while I'm not foolish enough to think I can change your beliefs, I think you as a man of reason should strongly reconsider looking into the historical writing of 10 AD - 60 AD which will have mention of the general Jewish disturbance within the Empire and does have passing mentions of Jesus the actual man.

2007-07-03 13:31:55 · answer #1 · answered by johnjacob01 4 · 2 1

Even for believers there are no proof in a positive way, except for the Holy Shroud.of Turin, who some believers, like me, assume is the true funeral wrappings of Jesus, before his resurrection.
Even the carbon 14 test was not terminal against it because the samples are taken for the same place, and they are supposed to be taken to different parts of the shroud to validate positive according to the scientific method.

Well, there is no proof because in 70 AC a great fire destroys Jerusalen with all their archives, so no proof can be made either against or in favor or Jesus true existence, because if ever was an eyewitness any non religious account was destroyed.

Some historians mention many historical facts who are repeated in the New Testament, though. Then the Bible New Testament is written about 40 BC to 70 BC, but that is our religious book, that atheists never take as a historic proof.

2007-07-03 13:28:04 · answer #2 · answered by Alder_Fiter_Galaz 4 · 1 1

Did you know Jesus DID exist?
Lucian of Samosta, 2nd century: "The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day--the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account. . . . You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the comtempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property." Lucian also reported that the Christians had "sacred writings" which were frequently read. When something affected them, "they spare no trouble, no expense."

Crucified Messiah Scroll: It contains parallel information to the NT on the Messiah's death before His return to rule the nations. It is worth mentioning that many scholars believed that Jews during the first century believed that the Messiah would rule without dying. This scroll shows the Essene writer understood the dual role of the Messiah.

It mentions the Messiah as the shoot of Jesse, the Branch of David, and also that He was pierced and wounded. Note the Messianic prophecy in Psalms 22:16 - "They pierced my hands and feet." Also see Jeremiah 23:5 - "I will raise unto David a righteous branch."

Do you believe everything you read? Can't you research and find the answers for yourself? After YOU find the answers believe what you want ... I believe Jesus DID exist.

2007-07-03 13:27:59 · answer #3 · answered by isc_cooper 3 · 1 0

Hello,

As a historical figure his is briefly mentioned by thr Roman historions Tacitus, Suetonius, Pliny and Josephus. His life and demise did not seem to have any big impact at all during the lives of these men but it is highly likely he did exist as an real entity in the 1st century according to many historians. Even those trying to disprove his divinity and trying to say he had a blood line seem to still think of his existence though by no means divine. There were also hundreds of prophets like him in his time with different messages.

Lucian was qualified as a satirist and rhetorician.He anticipated "modern" fictional themes like voyages to the moon and Venus, extraterrestrial life and wars between planets centuries before Jules Verne and H. G. Wells. He could actually be called the Father of science fiction.

Lucian also wrote a satire called The Passing of Peregrinus[3], in which the lead character, Proteus, takes advantage of the generosity and gullibility of Christians. This is one of the earliest surviving pagan perceptions of Christianity. His Philopseudes (Greek for "Lover of lies") is a frame story which includes the original version of "The Sorcerer's Apprentice".

Based on the info above the first four historians mentioned are better sorces for historical reliability since history was their craft not stories and satire. Perhaps quoting him is fallacy to the wrong authority.

Michael

2007-07-03 13:32:53 · answer #4 · answered by Michael Kelly 5 · 1 0

I can`t argue with a genius , Eggbert ! But ........ on the other the other , I`ve never mentioned YOUR name to anyone , but yet YOU exist .......... correct ? And who exactly was Lucien ? God`s right hand man ?

There have been many writings by MANY authors over the ages , and probably the majority of them don`t mention Jesus , so why is Lucius so different ?

As for Jesus not ever existing , you are in fact calling God a liar , because God mentioned several times in the Bible he was sending his Son as a ransom sacrifice for all mankind !

Before you go any further blubbering incoherently about this subject , you should first do your homework , plus a lot of research ! ....... (Yeah , I know , your friends consider you an expert on the subject) .

2007-07-03 13:32:43 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

You are wrong historians have proven his existence.

Josephus, the Talmud. Josephus, a Jewish aristocrat turned politician, was recruited by the Romans during the first Jewish revolt to act as a mediator and write a historical record of events at the time. He records that Jesus was a wise man that did many wonderful works, and that many people - both Jews and Gentiles - followed after him. The Talmud, written by Jewish sources at the time, is (not surprisingly) unfriendly toward the founder of Christianity. The important point, however, is that Jewish sources do not deny that Jesus was a real historical figure -- they only promote a different interpretation of of his conception.

the Gospels, early church fathers and historians. The four gospels - Matthew, Mark, Luke and John - are judged by most scholars to be reliable, historical testimony of eye-witnesses. These gospels, as well as the Acts of the Apostles, the letters of Paul and the other Apostles, are judged to have been written from 40 A.D. to 100 A.D. -- all within a few decades of the life of Jesus. The early church fathers were the leaders and teachers in the church who followed the apostles - many were also disciples of these same apostles.

2007-07-03 13:15:55 · answer #6 · answered by TRACER ™ 6 · 7 1

Did you know that your so-called "rational response" is about as significant to a child of God as a cup of snow is to an eskimo?
Are you blind or is it just that you can't see?

What is it, do you suppose, that drives you to feed on the spirituality of another; you mock and ridicule - you pierce the very heart of man in your lame attempts to suck
the Holy Spirit out of a person - a bloodsucker you are, no better; but you have accomplished one great feat, and for that you should receive that recognition you deserve: You have gotten the attention of your Creator. You claim to know the Word of God? You have the knowledge God gave a grapefruit - you are God's joke of the week, a silly jester; a poor excuse for a living entity. Shall the world come to a great revelation at your hand that Jesus Christ is not the Son of the Living God, because YOU have such little knowledge of the manuscripts? You are, of course, fluent
in all three Biblical languages, right? You have studied the customs and idioms or hebreisms of the time, of course, right?
You ARE, certainly, an authority in Biblical Prophecy as compared to secular social,
economic, educational, and religious dynasties as they relate to the writings of the Prophets, you surely must be to have such an extensive knowledge.

I did visit your website, which says absolutely nothing, however it suggests that you are an immature little person, very insecure, not able to feel a part of any group, yet so desperately needing to feel noticed; I see a little person who is screaming out for attention - good or bad, it doesn't matter - just like a small child who acts up to get the attention of his father, even a spanking is perferable to nothing at all; the 14 yr old who shocks his parents by coming home with a mohawk and a tongue
piercing;
without your senseless attacks on people of faith, you would be nobody, nothing, invisable. You don't respond to ration; you only respond to attention. You have combined the "shock value" of the mohawk
and the mockings and ridicule of the insecure child, and formed a silly little fan club for all those other young teens who need their asses smacked and their computers taken out of their bedrooms.
I strongly doubt you are even of age to be online without parental supervision.

The only myth for you is the one where you believe you are actually going to get away with this nonsense; Oh, back to that ship;
You go on and sail that boat of yours.
Bon Voyage, Captain........

2007-07-03 14:47:43 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

no matter how much you try, you will not take away my Faith in God, or Jesus. I along with Millions of others all over this Earth know the truth. I KNOW there is a God...look at our Universe...How do you explain that our planet was placed PRECISELY is the most perfect spot to allow us to have the perfect weather to sustain life??? if our planet was to either side even an inch it would be complete chaos. tell me that isn't evidence of a God..... look at everything around you....it's ignorance and pride, to think we just happened to evolve from nothing without the guidence of a higherpower.. you have a choice to not believe but don't try to break down those that do... it's not up to you. and we do have evidence that Jesus existed.....its all written in the Holy Bible.

2007-07-03 13:20:48 · answer #8 · answered by tweetybird37406 6 · 3 0

Are you aware of the fact that historians do not reject an account of unreliable simply because it's not an eyewitness account? If they did that, much of history could not be known. They consider BOTH eyewitness and secondary accounts. While it's true that eyewitness accounts are definitely preferable to second hand or third hand sources, no credible historian would throw out a source simply because it's second or thirdhand.

2015-04-23 14:50:50 · answer #9 · answered by Evan 1 · 0 0

I don't understand, why would you believe Lucian, no one important from back then, over Jesus, who was led by the Holy Spirit? DO YOU KNOW THAT THERE IS PROOF THAT THE BIBLE WAS WRITTEN BY GOD? ONLY IF YOU ARE SERIOUSLY OPEN TO LEARNING DO I WANT YOU TO RESPOND. Some people don't want to look at their answers, and this is pretty elaborate, I added you to my contacts so if you want to hear some of my experiences please respond. THIS IS SCIENTIFICALLY BASED FROM HIDDEN CODES IN THE BIBLE!

2007-07-03 13:24:35 · answer #10 · answered by Charles E 3 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers