Are you ok with the fact that not one contemporaneous person mentions Jesus?

Question

If I saw a guy walk on water and turn water into wine, I'd sure jot it down or snap a picture with my new digital camera.

contemporaneous means "originating, existing, or happening during the same period of time"

Answer 1

Are you serious!!!

Where you around at the time of the Dinosaurs!

Not one person! how do you know that. Where you alive, oops sorry! contemporaneously then as well as today!

Answer 2

First of all, no respected scholar -- Jewish or Gentile, believer or unbeliever -- doubts the fact that Jesus walked the earth. And contemporaneous accounts DO exist. Here are only two:

1) Another answerer mentioned the fact that the Gospels were written by men who walked with Jesus. Most unbelievers counter with the assertion that there is no proof these Gospels were written during Jesus' lifetime; therefore, they suppose, it is probable that these men didn't even write them. This was proven to be false when a fragment known as "7Q5" was found among the Dead Sea Scrolls -- this fragment was a portion of the Gospel of Mark, Chapter 6 and is tentatively dated 30 -35 CE. Therefore, the Gospel of Mark is a contemporaneous source.

2) The Talmud mentions Jesus, but ascribes his miracles to demons and to witchcraft He allegedly learned in Egypt. As you are no doubt aware, the Talmud is a compilation of oral traditions passed down from one Jewish generation to the next. In the middle ages, most of the references to Jesus in the Talmud were redacted, to prevent many Jews from being killed (the Talmud was first printed during this time and became available to both Jewish and Gentile sources). Today, many Jews deny Jesus is mentioned in the Talmud, but most Jews have only read the redacted version. To learn more, please read this: http://www.moriel.org/articles/israel/jesus_in_the_talmud.htm

These are only two sources, but more exist.

Answer 3

First, there are contemporaneous writings. Some of them were put together in one binding. It's called the Bible. I'm much more concerned that you dismiss eye witness testimony, just because the name on the book spine is Bible.

Most history classes teach "factual" history based on less evidence than exists for Jesus. We're all taught about Aristotle, but the earliest copy of his work that we have access to dates from 1,400 years AFTER he died. Sophocles, the samae. Plato, 1,200 years, on and on. The Gospels were written before 70 AD. Jesus died in about 30 to 33 AD. That's a very, very short span before they were written by men who were living and knew him personally.

In fact, much of what's taught in schools has never been snapped by your digital camera. Evolution would be a good place to start, yet atheists fight tooth and nail for it.

Answer 4

Eds

Pliny the Younger was born after Jesus' death, hardly contemporary. Josephus was discovered to be a fraud, do your research before displaying your ignorance.

Mathew, Mark, Luke and John were written at least 80 years later, unless these authors were 100 years old, when they decided to write, it seems highly improbable that they actually did the writing.

Most is heresay, this person said this, and that, and then written as if they were writing it.

Just like "Moses" in the book of Moses, obviously did not write about his own death.

Many of the authors of the bible are suspect. And the contemporary writers of the day (which there is barely any), have either turned out to be frauds, or actually written in later.

Of those documents, none of the originals surived, only the translations of the translations.

Answer 5

Are YOU okay with being a fanatic of fact -- provable, touchable, observable, verifiable, or else it is stupid to believe it -- while ignoring historical evidence, not even LOOKING for the fact You claim is missing?

Are we not all brainwashed to some degree? There is certainly no contemporaneous witness to the big bang.

Atheist is fine. Belief-bashing is NOT okay.

Answer 6

My take on the whole bible, god, Jesus, heaven and hell is that way back in the day some one wrote the "bible" as just a story book, an innocent piece of lit. but , as things usually do, it got out of hand and Bam now look what we have today, all because some idiot wrote a book, good job.

And yes, one would think that if Jesus rly was alive if he rly did do these things people claimed he did then some one would have drawn it out and at least wrote a note somewhere on it , bible does not count.

Answer 7

con·tem·po·ra·ne·ous (kn-tmp-rn-s) KEY

ADJECTIVE:

Originating, existing, or happening during the same period of time: the contemporaneous reigns of two monarchs. See Synonyms at contemporary.


Well I can show you a photo of Bahaullah

look at it and tell me if you FEEL anything
Fear love confusion contentment

here is the link

http://www.biocrawler.com/w/images/thumb/9/96/250px-Bahaullah_from_miller.jpg

Answer 8

Josephus mentions him, and he mentjons Jesus' brother James. That account has been added to over the centuries by Christians to have it include things Josephus himself would not have said, but a majority of historians accept the basic reference itself as historical.

"Historical" biographies in those days bore a different intent and purpose than today's analogous works. And there are accounts of other of Jesus' contemporaries that include miraculous embellishments, like biographies of Augustus Caesar. That doesn't mean there was no Augustus Caesar.

The Gospels are not histories, and they were not intended as such. They are religious literature, looking ultimately to convey a truth that is transhistorical.

I'm reminded of New Testament scholar, John Crossan's analogy, inviting us to imagine a statue of Abraham Lincoln taking an ax to the leg irons of a slave to free him. Did that actually happen? No. Is it true? Yes.
.

Answer 9

I am not okay with it at all. And since the gospels contradict in clear and obvious ways I think it is proof positive for any non-brainwashed person that the stories were embellished and in some cases made up entirely.

That is... if Jesus ever even existed, which he may not have. We don't know because nobody was there who wrote anything down.

Answer 10

Young Atheist,
This has been mentioned many times. There were a number of historians who DID mention HIM. They wrote about HIM in their documents. Please do a little research before making a completely wrong statement. Josephus and Pliny the Younger are two of them that I recall. There are also HIS Apostles who were former Jewish members and Saul who became Paul. Have a wonderful week.
Thanks,
Eds


.

Answer 11

wordman, the synoptic gospels were not written by the people in who's names they are labeled. The oldest of which (John, I believe) was written between 50 and 70 AD, and the others are shown to be re-writes with some improvisatiions.

Outside the bible, the works of Flavius Josephus have been thought to be a good historical source, but it's recently been shown that christian leadership in the middle ages added the jesus part to further their own aggenda.