Daggers on a coin of Brutus (Kunsthistorisches Museum, Wien)

The last words of Julius Caesar are often quoted as Et tu Brute?, “You too, Brutus?” They are also quoted as Tu quoque, Brute?, which means the same. The second variant has been sufficiently popular to make logicians apply these words to a well-known logical fallacy (“pot calling the kettle black“).

That those famous last words are quoted in two versions, already suggests that something’s gone wrong. They cannot both be correct. As it turns out, the expression “Et tu Brute” has been coined by Shakespeare (Julius Caesar, act 3, scene 1); they are not the dictator’s final words, though, because he reflects upon his own death in characteristic third-person, “Then fall, Caesar”.

That leaves us with Tu quoque, Brute. But Caesar probably did not even say that. According to Suetonius, he just sighed, or said something in Greek:

When he saw that he was beset on every side by drawn daggers, he muffled his head in his robe, and at the same time drew down its lap to his feet with his left hand, in order to fall more decently, with the lower part of his body also covered. And in this wise he was stabbed with three and twenty wounds, uttering not a word, but merely a groan at the first stroke, though some have written that when Marcus Brutus rushed at him, he said in Greek, “You too, my child?” (καὶ σὺ τέκνον;)

[Suetonius, Life of Caesar, 82.2]

<Overview of Common Errors>

REVELATION 13 (Part 4: Nero’s Beastly Character)

Adam Maarschalk: October 22 & 29, 2009

Scripture text for this study: Revelation 13:1-18

We have now reached the fourth post on Revelation 13. The first post looked at the first 10 verses in this chapter, showing that Nero fit the description of the first beast in the specific sense and that first-century Rome fit the description of this same beast in the general sense. In the second post, we were introduced to its main advocate, a second beast, and we considered four different views regarding the identity of this second beast. In the third post we examined the healing of the first beast’s mortal wound, the mark of the beast, and the fact of its identification with the famous “666″ symbol. In this post we will look more closely into the character of Nero and the atrocities he committed, and in doing so we will see that the term “beast” fits him well.

—————————————————————————————————————————

In the first post on chapter 13 we saw a number of details regarding Nero’s campaign of persecution from November 64 AD – June 68 AD (42 months). Some of these details will be quickly summarized here, as this contributes to our understanding of his beastly character. First, we are told by numerous early church writers (e.g. Eusebius, Lactantius, and Sulpicius Severus) that Nero was the first emperor to persecute the saints, with Clement of Rome (30-100 AD) saying that Nero targeted “a vast multitude of the elect…through many indignities and tortures.”

These tortures included being “wrapped in the hides of wild beasts…torn to pieces by dogs, or fastened to crosses to be set on fire, that when the darkness fell they might be burned to illuminate the night” (Tacitus, Annals 15:44); Nero’s vast garden was lit at night so he could provide raunchy entertainment of all kinds. Some believers were beheaded (Paul), others were crucified (Peter), while others were “thrown to the lions, exposed to the cold, drowned in rivers, thrown into cauldrons of boiling oil, daubed with pitch and burned for torchlights” (David S. Clark).

This persecution came about after Nero’s Jewish wife persuaded him to blame the Christians for the burning of 10 of Rome’s 14 city divisions. Legend has it that Nero “fiddled while Rome burned,” with some ancient historians affirming this account (Suetonius, Cassius Dio) and others (e.g. Tacitus) calling it into question. Clement of Alexandria [150-215 AD], Tertullian [160-220 AD], Augustine [354-430 AD], and Jerome [347-420 AD] are among the early church writers who stated their belief that Nero was the beast foretold in the book of Revelation, and Jerome even stated that there were “many” in his time who shared this view because of Nero’s “outstanding savagery and depravity.” The following information (in maroon-colored font) is taken from a term paper I wrote several months ago:

Richard Anthony (The Mark of the Beast, 2009) shares more details about Nero’s life and character, all of which is substantiated by Suetonius (in his book Nero) and other historians who lived during the first two centuries AD:

According to Suetonius, he [Nero] murdered his parents, wife, brother, aunt, and many others close to him and of high station in Rome. He was a torturer, a homosexual rapist, and a sodomite. He even married two young boys and paraded them around as his wives. One of the boys, whose name was Sporus, was castrated by Nero. He was truly bestial in his character, depravity, and actions. He devised a kind of game: covered with the skin of some wild animal, he was let loose from a cage and attacked the private parts of men and women, who were bound at stakes. He also initiated the war against the Jews which led to the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD.

At one point, writes Kenneth Gentry (Before Jerusalem Fell, 2002), Nero divorced his first wife, Octavia, in order to marry Poppaea, his mistress. Poppaea then gave orders to have Octavia banished to an island, where in 62 AD she was beheaded. Three years later, when Poppaea was pregnant and ill, Nero kicked her to death. For entertainment, according to the Roman historian Suetonius, Nero “compelled four hundred senators and six hundred Roman knights, some of whom were well to do and of unblemished reputation, to fight in the arena.” The Roman historian Tacitus (55-117 AD) knew Nero as the one who “put to death so many innocent men,” and Pliny the Elder (23-79 AD) called Nero “the destroyer of the human race” and “the poison of the world” (p. 52).

In Revelation 13:2 the beast is described as having a mouth “like a lion’s mouth.” It’s most revealing that the apostle Paul describes his deliverance from the emperor Nero as being “rescued from the lion’s mouth” (II Timothy 4:16-17). Also fitting is this quote from Apollonius of Tyana (15-98 AD), a Greek philosopher:

In my travels, which have been wider than ever man yet accomplished, I have seen many, many wild beasts of Arabia and India; but this beast, that is commonly called a Tyrant, I know not how many heads it has, nor if it be crooked of claw, and armed with horrible fangs. …And of wild beasts you cannot say that they were ever known to eat their own mothers, but Nero has gorged himself on this diet.

[Source: A.T. Robinson, Redating the New Testament. Philadelphia: Westminster (1976), p. 235. This quote was taken from Philostratus, Life of Apollonius, Oxford Press, 1912, p. 38.]

Apollonius was not the only contemporary of Nero to refer to him as a “beast.” Josephus and Suetonius also did so, according to David Lowman, an author and a pastor in Colorado Springs. Lowman adds that Nero schemed with his mother to kill his father and half-brother, and then attempted at least seven times to kill his mother. He also “executed one of his two closest advisers and forced the other to commit suicide.” Regarding again Nero’s persecution of the saints, Lowman notes that Nero had some “drawn and quartered”; others tied to the tusks of elephants which then were made to charge each other; others disemboweled while alive; and still others “sawn in two with palm branches – a very long lasting and brutally painful penalty.” Lowman wrote the following concerning Nero’s “garden parties”:

The most horrific stories of Nero’s brutality involved the lighting of His garden parties. It was known that in order to light his three and four day garden parties he would have Christian impaled with large wooden posts, and while still alive, struggling for breath, would have them covered in flammable tar and oil and light them on fire. He would place the posts along the outskirts of the large palace garden and along the roads to light the way for his guests. Quite often the events listed above would be done in front of rather large audiences in the arena. he would end these events with tortuously long musical performances that attendees could not leave under the penalty of death, including the ruling Senators of Rome.

Under Nero, John was tarred and feathered, boiled in oil (yet he miraculously survived), and then exiled. This is according to the testimony of early church writers such as Tertullian and Jerome, as I wrote here.

The next and final post on Revelation 13 will feature a comparative chart showing 10 prophecies regarding the beast from the sea and their non-coincidental fulfillment by Nero and the Roman Empire which he led, represented, and personified.

Why do Roman women have this fixation or obsession with the letter, ‘a’? Does it have some religious significance of its own or what? Is it a totem of good fortune and prosperity? I am quite surprised that Historians had not stumbled across this fact earlier on. Maybe they have and have chosen to keep Mum over the whole issue. All the names of Female Aristocrats in the Roman society end with the letter ‘a’. Check out the names of the spouses of the Roman emperors from Augustus to Constantine, the Great. Here are a few samples.

Livia(Augustus),Julia(Tiberius),Caesonia(Caligula),Messalina(Claudius),Poppaea Sabina(Nero),Domitia(Domitian),Plotina(Trajanus),Faustina(Antoninus Pius),Faustina(Aurelius),Marcia(Commodus),Sabina(Hadrian),Julia(Septimius Severus),Severa(Philip),Cornelia Paula(Elagabalus)and Fausta(Constantine, the Great).

Roman society was Patriarchal in nature. It was chauvinistic and biased against women. They could not be educated and were barred from the arts of Law, Medicine, Philosophy and the Classics. There were no female versions of Virgil, Cicero, Pliny (Elder and Younger), Suetonius and Dio Cassius.They could not bear arms and were banned from serving in the Roman legions. They could not hold the administrative positions of Aedile or Duovir.and could not be admitted to the sacred and exclusive cult of Mithras.Bluntly Put, Roman women were second class citizens in the Empire.

However, Roman women were fiercely independent in words and actions. Within the family, women played an important role in childbearing and the management of the household. They controlled the purse stings and purchased goods for consumption by the family. They took loans when necessary to balance the accounts and budgets of the family.

They played the dual roles of managers and advisers to their husbands who were often away from home in defense of the empire and realm. Part of the duties included control over slaves who performed many domestic tasks Roman women were noted for their strength and loyalty, but also for their sexual freedom.

Although Adultery was punishable by death or exile, most chose to take the risk of discovery and ruin. Augustus’s daughter, Julia was extremely promiscuous and was renowned for her escapades at the forum. When she was asked how she managed to bear children that resembled her husbands, she replied; “I only take in passengers when the boat is full”. Octavian was so distraught about her wantonness; he seriously considered putting her to death because of the strict Julian Marriage laws in force at the time. He settled on exile, but she was later starved to death on the orders of her former husband, Tiberius.

Domitian (Dominus et Deus) murdered the actor, Paris because of his affair with his wife, Domitia.She was sent into exile on account of this.Septimius Severus turned a blind eye to the affairs of his wife, Julia.She committed incest with his successor and son, Caracalla.Hadrian’s wife, Sabina was to take for a lover, a slave in retaliation for her husband’s infatuation with the Greek boy, Antinous.

Roman women also had rights under the common and civil laws. They could not be bought or sold into slavery unless they had been convicted of a serious offence (like treason). They could own property. (Vespasian’s wife came into the marriage with a sizable dowry).They could divorce their husbands and could not be put to death without full recourse of the law.

Roman women were also Kingmakers. They pulled the puppet strings, advising their men folks on matters of the state. Until Nero had his mother, Agrippina stabbed to death; she held considerable sway and Nero had to seek her consent in making important appointments of state. The priestess, Acte controlled Nero and Suetonius in his biography, The Private Lives of the Twelve Caesars, describes her as an evil genius who had a deep hold over the emperor.

Hadrian became Emperor under the machinations of Plotina (Trajanus’s widow).She forged a will naming him as heir and successor to Trajan who had died on his way to Rome from his Parthian Campaign. She even went as far as getting an actor to mimic the feeble voice of her husband. The Roman senate accepted this deception and proclaimed Hadrian as emperor of Rome.

Under Elagabalus, Roman law was amended to give women entrance to Senate meetings and deliberations at the Capitol. This was a revolution for the times, unheard of and was at the instigation of the two Julias (Maesa and Domna).There was a return to the status quo after the assassination of Elagabalus by the Praetorian guards. When the Roman general, Avidius Cassius rose in rebellion against Marcus Aurelius, the emperor’s wife took matters into her hands and wrote a letter urging her husband to deal harshly with the insurgency.Faustina’s ploy worked.Avidius was declared an enemy of the state and put to death on the orders of the Roman senate.

Most of the gods that the Romans chose to worship had a female gender.Venus; Aphrodite, Isis, Earth and Minerva were eagerly sought by the Romans for protection and good luck. The night that Emperor Domitian (Dominus et Deus) was struck down by assassins, he dreamt that Minerva told him that she could no longer guard him because she had been disarmed by Jupiter.

The functions of worship were carried out by women. The priestesses of Isis (the goddess of fertility) were women. So also were the renowned Vestal virgins of Rome. The public processions across Rome were led by women priests. The emperor, Domitian (Dominus et Deus) added a new spice to gladiatorial fights at the Colosseum by admitting members of the fairer sex to participate.

Emperor Elagabalus was so enamored with the physiology of women that he sought a sex change and offered huge sums of money to any surgeon who could alter his appearance and give him female genitalia.His attempts came to naught.

The advent of the new religion of Christianity did not improve the lot of women in the empire.St Paul was to write in his letters to the Corinthians that Women were to keep silence and leave all matters to their husbands.

Even the ruin of Rome was predicated on the whims of a Princess who had been caught in the act of adultery with a page boy who was put to death. This infuriated the fiery princess who invited Attila the Hun to ravage Rome. He took her up on the offer.

Η καλίγα (caliga, σαν αυτήν που εκτίθεται στο Γαλλικό Εθνικό Αρχαιολογικό Μουσείο) ήταν το σανδάλι των Ρωμαίων στρατιωτών (αποκεί βγαίνει και το «καλιγώνω», πεταλώνω — και ο τετραπέρατος «καλιγώνει και ψύλλο»). Ο Γάιος Καίσαρ Γερμανικός μεγάλωσε στα στρατόπεδα, ανάμεσα στους λεγεωνάριους του πατέρα του, που του κόλλησαν το παρατσούκλι Caligula (Παπουτσάκη θα τον έλεγαν στην Κρήτη ). Με αυτό το όνομα έμεινε στην ιστορία ο κατοπινός αυτοκράτορας, ο γνωστός για τα παρανοϊκά καμώματά του.

Ανάμεσα στα διάφορα καμώματα του Καλιγούλα, του κόλλησαν και τη βρόμα ότι έκανε συγκλητικό το άλογό του (τον «ακάθεκτο» Incitatus). Η μοναδική πηγή για το μύθευμα φαίνεται να είναι ο ιστορικός Σουητώνιος, ο οποίος, στους Βίους των Καισάρων, γράφει, δύο γενιές μετά τα χρόνια του Καλιγούλα (Suetonius, De vita Caesarum, μετάφραση από εδώ):

The day before the Circensian games, he used to send his soldiers to enjoin silence in the neighbourhood, that the repose of his horse Incitatus might not be disturbed. For this favourite animal, besides a marble stable, an ivory manger, purple housings, and a jewelled frontlet, he appointed a house, with a retinue of slaves, and fine furniture, for the reception of such as were invited in the horse’s name to sup with him. It is even said that he intended to make him consul. (Στο πρωτότυπο: consulatum quoque traditur destinasse)

Ξέρουμε ότι ο Σουητώνιος διάνθιζε τις ιστορίες του με διάφορα παραμυθάκια και ο Καλιγούλας ήταν ένας πρόσφορος στόχος, οπότε πάλι καλά που κάνει κι αυτή την ουδέτερη διατύπωση, «λέγεται ότι το προόριζε για ύπατο» (consul = ύπατος, senator = συγκλητικός). Ξέρουμε ότι οι ύπατοι ήταν οι ανώτατοι αξιωματούχοι, πάνω από τους συγκλητικούς, με τους οποίους ο Καλιγούλας βρισκόταν σε διαρκή διαμάχη, οπότε δεν αποκλείεται να έκανε τέτοια σχέδια για το άλογό του, μια και τους ανθρώπους ούτε τους αγαπούσε ούτε τους εμπιστευόταν.

Πολύ αργότερα, ο ακόμα πιο ανακριβής Δίων ο Κάσσιος γράφει: One of the horses, which he named Incitatus, he used to invite to dinner, where he would offer him golden barley and drink his health in wine from golden goblets; he swore by the animal’s life and fortune and even promised to appoint him consul, a promise that he would certainly have carried out if he had lived longer. (Η τελευταία πρόταση πρέπει να διδάσκεται σαν παράδειγμα γραφής ιστορίας προς αποφυγήν.)

Δεν έκανε συγκλητικό το άλογό του ο Καλιγούλας. Λέγεται ότι απειλούσε ότι θα το ανακηρύξει ύπατο — αυτό μόνο μπορούμε να πούμε.

EATING ON THE GO: Archaeologists believe the structure supported a rotating dining room imitating the Earth's movement and used by Roman Emperor Nero to impress guests in his Golden Palace.

www.stuff.co.nz 30/9/09

Archaeologists have unveiled what they think are the remains of Roman emperor Nero’s extravagant banquet hall, a circular space that rotated day and night to imitate the Earth’s movement and impress his guests.

The room, part of Nero’s Golden Palace, a sprawling residence built in the first century AD, is thought to have been built to entertain government officials and VIPs, said lead archaeologist Francoise Villedieu.

The emperor, known for his lavish and depraved lifestyle, ruled from 37 AD to 68 AD.

The dig has so far turned up the foundations of the room, the rotating mechanism underneath and part of an attached space believed to be the kitchens, she said.

“This cannot be compared to anything that we know of in ancient Roman architecture,” Villedieu told reporters during a tour of the cordoned-off dig.

She said the location of the discovery atop the Palatine Hill, the rotating structure and references to it in ancient biographies of Nero, make the attribution to the emperor most likely.

The partially-excavated site is part of the sumptuous residence, also known by its Latin name Domus Aurea, which rose over the ruins of a fire that destroyed much of Rome in AD 64.

The purported main dining room, with a diameter of over 16m, rested upon a 4m-wide pillar and four spherical mechanisms that, possibly powered by a constant flow of water, rotated the structure.

The discovery was made during routine maintenance of the fragile Palatine area, officials said.

Latin biographer and historian Suetonius, who chronicled his times and wrote the biographies of 12 Roman rulers, refers to a main dining room that revolved “day and night, in time with the sky.”

Angelo Bottini, the state’s top official for archaeology in Rome, said the ceiling of the rotating room might have been the one mentioned by Suetonius, who wrote of ivory panels sliding back and forth to shower flowers and perfumes on the guests below.

“The heart of every activity in ancient Rome was the banquet, together with some form of entertainment,” Bottini said at the dig. “Nero was like the sun, and people were revolving around the emperor.”

That part of the palace – which sprawled across nearly 80 hectares, occupying parts of four out of Rome’s seven ancient hills – offered a panoramic view over the Roman Forum and a lake, later drained by Nero’s successors to build the Colosseum, Bottini said.

Described by Suetonius as one of Rome’s most cruel, depraved and megalomaniac rulers, Nero often indulged in orgies and, fancying himself an artist, entertained guests with his own performances of poetry and songs.

However, Nero did not enjoy the frescoed halls and gold-encrusted ceilings of his Golden Palace for too long. It was completed in AD 68 – the year the unpopular emperor committed suicide amid a revolt.

For the first few days we read Suetonius, my students complained.  “This is too hard.” “How can we read this stuff?” “This is boring!”

And who could blame them? The first twenty or so paragraphs are difficult grammatically, and hardly a page-turner.  It’s a study in Nero’s capabilities as a governor and administrator, as well as an early examination of his family’s history over the previous two hundred years.  Yawn, who cares?

But then in the hallway after study hall last night, two boys who are not big readers grabbed me by the arm.  I am not a small man — I’m 6′ 2″ and I weigh more than I should.  But they broke through the physical contact barrier to seize hold of me.

“This Nero guy is a freak!” one kid told me. “Read my translation!”  And I did.  It told how Nero had prisoners tied to stakes in the arena, while he came out of an underground den dressed in animal skins to attack and rape both the male and female prisoners; and how he ended his ‘performance’ by having sex in front of the audience with his male companion Doryphorus.

“You think that’s bad!?” said another young man. “Get a load of this!” And he presented his own discoveries of how Nero had a young man gelded and womanized just because he could; and regularly seduced married women, and even one of the Vestal Virgins, a senior priestess of the state religion.

It’s likely that I will be criticized for subjecting ninth graders to such difficult and sexually and violently explicit stuff.

Yet none of these students will ever buy into the idea that a President is ‘evil’ just because he comes up with bad policies, or has consensual sex with an intern.  They’ll know what an evil dictatorship looks like from reading a firsthand account of it.

Today, they’ll see a page from the official school history book — which says of Nero:

Nero

• Bad emperor
• good administrator
• murdered many
• unnecessarily cruel

This is not a genuine or useful summary of the career of one of the most self-centered, profligate, and megalomaniac  insane world leaders who ever lived.  And it does a disservice to our students to shut them out of the real story for the sake of “protecting them” from terrible truths.

But consider.  Both of the boys who pulled me aside on Monday night to talk to me about Nero and Suetonius are considered at risk — both are diagnosed with learning disabilities of various sorts.  Both are considered ‘fragile’ in some way, because they “don’t like reading” or they “don’t like learning“.

Clearly, they like reading.  They like reading real stories, about real people doing horrible things. They like reading as adults and in a world view that they can dig into without feeling like they’re being pandered to.

And schools, and school teachers? Trying to make a difference in your budgets and bottom lines? These texts are free. They came from Project Gutenberg, or the Internet Classics Archive, or from the Perseus Project.  Your high school students will learn to work with primary sources; they’ll learn to weigh evidence, and compare primary and secondary sources.

This is why we study the ancients, you school boards! Not to hear about how how Rome’s republic crashed, or how Rome fell in catabolic stages, like a doyenne tripping down the stairs. But because it is only by knowing the truly bad, and too the best of what the world has ever known, that you raise up citizens equal to the challenges that lie ahead.

Next up, I’m trying to decide between Pliny’s letter describing the eruption of Vesuvius in August AD 79, or the Martyrdom of Priscilla — which would you read next?

My students are modernizing a public-domain translation of Suetonius downloaded from Project Gutenberg.

Yesterday, I was pretty excited.  It seemed like the students labled “disabled learners” were able to pull ahead rapidly due to computer use.  They completed their paragraphs in class, while most of the pen-and-paper learners spent an additional twenty minutes on the assignment in the evening.

Alas, not so fast, little teacher.  Today I got back the drafts of paragraphs, and the results are mildly disappointing.  First of all, the ‘better performing’ students are still making bad mistakes in their writing.  Yet the mistakes they made are aren’t about word choice; they’re about comprehension.  Their sentences get goofy at exactly the places where Suetonius is least clear and most obtuse — therefore, the student didn’t “get” how to read that sentence.

But the ‘less capable’ students left Suetonius’s sentence structures, and used their computer thesauruses to replace the more complex words with other words — maybe they got some vocabulary practice, but they didn’t learn what Suetonius meant. A simple cut-and-paste job is not the same as comprehending what was written.  The blank stares when I asked them today to talk about their paragraphs was a little disconcerting — they knew the vocabulary, but not what was being said.

Need to rethink this lesson a bit.

But on the other hand, I definitely feel like the ‘diagnostic’ portion of my school year is moving ahead much faster as a result of computer use.  My students know how to use computers to learn the meanings of words.  They can also find synonyms. That part is easy.  What they can’t do is write new sentences to show that they understand old sentences, and that’s a different skill.  So that’s what I need to work on in the next few days.

The Historical Unreliability of Jesus: A Review of Robert VanVoorst’s Jesus Outside The New Testament

by Sarah Schoonmaker

Robert VanVoorst’s Jesus Outside the New Testament claims to provide evidence for Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection from non-Christian historians and Jewish writings. Jesus Outside the New Testament refers to the following classical writers in order to defend the historical reliability of Jesus: Thallos, Pliny the Younger, Suetonius, Tacitus, and Josephus. The purpose of this review is to address the historical writers that remain lauded as evidence for the historical Jesus and demonstrate how they all fail to bolster any historical support for Christianity.

Thallos:

VanVoorst points to Thallos as the earliest reference to Jesus set in the middle of the first century 55 C.E. Most of Thallos’ works perished, but was quoted by Sextus Julius Africanus, a Christian writer in his History of the World.  This book was eventually lost, but the quote originating with Thallos was also mentioned by Byzantine historian, Georgius Syncellus. According to Syncellus, when Julius Africanus writes about the darkness of the death of Jesus, he mentions that, “Thallos calls this an eclipse of the sun, which seems to be wrong.”[i] Julius claims that the darkness was miraculous, “a darkness induced by God.” Even though Thallos could have mentioned the eclipse with no reference to Jesus, VanVoorst claims that it is more likely that Julius who had access to the context of Thallos’ quotation was correcting Thallos as a “hostile reference to Jesus’ death.”[ii] For instance, VanVoorst concludes, “if Thallos was simply writing about an eclipse, Julius Africanus would not have cared to say that Thallos was mistaken.”[iii]

In logic, when an argument against a particular view is offered, one mentions the claim under refutation, followed by premises and a conclusion. If Thallos were arguing against the claim that the eclipse was associated with the death of Jesus, he would have mentioned this event. However, there is no reference to Jesus, so therefore, one cannot conclude that it is even likely that Thallos was responding to a Christian claim about the “darkness induced by God” surrounding Jesus’ death. VanVoorst’s conclusion is a straw man fallacy because he creates an argument that Thallos does not claim to make. At best one may only infer that Thallos wrote about Jesus in his lost writings, but this is a massive assumption.

Pliny the Younger

As a prominent lawyer and senator in Rome, Pliny published nine books of letters between 100 and 109.[iv] He writes about punishment of Christians specifically by the Roman governor Trajan. Pliny also records that Christians would “sing hymns to Christ before dawn on a determined day and took oaths to refrain from theft, robbery, and adultery, not to break any promises, and not to withhold a deposit when reclaimed.”[v]

Pliny also tells Trajan that, “many people of all classes, ages, and regions of his province are infected by this contagious superstition.”[vi] VanVoorst credits this source fairly by claiming that Pliny’s writings do not bear independent witness to Jesus independent of Christianity. “What is related about Christ confirms two points made in the New Testament: first, Christians worship Christ in their songs (Phil. 2:5-11; Col. 1:15-20; Rev. 5:11,13), and second, no Christian reviles or curses Christ (1 Cor. 12:3). Pliny, however, shows no knowledge of Christian writings in his letter.”[vii]

Pliny bears witness to the practices of Christianity and the persecution from the government. However, he offers no contribution to the historical Jesus.  As a result, he is equivalent to any other historian writing about Greek mythology. Just because a historian writes about a certain group worshipping a god or gods, this does not validate the existence of their god or gods.

Suetonius

The Roman writer Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus (ca. 70-ca. 140) practiced law in Rome and was a friend of Pliny the Younger. He published a book Lives of the Caesars, which covers the lives and careers of the first twelve emperors, from Julius Caesar to Domitian.[viii] In the fifth section of Lives of the Caesars, Suetonius reports how emperor Claudius treated several people during his reign. The quote claimed to support Jesus Christ is as follows, “He (Claudius) expelled the Jews from Rome, since they were always making disturbances because of the instigator Chrestus.”[ix]

VanVoorst claims that “Christus” often found confusion with “Chrestus,” by non-Christians. Furthermore, the Codex Sinaiticus (fourth century) spells Christian with an -“eta” in all three New Testament occurrences of the word (Acts 11:26, 26:8; 1 Pet 4:16).[x] In particular, “Christians” were also referred to as “Chrestians.” I find VanVoorst most convincing for the possibility of the connection to Jesus Christ when he claims that ‘Chrestus’ “does not appear among the hundreds of names of Jews recorded by the Roman catacomb inscriptions and other sources, yet was a familiar Gentile name. He concludes that this opens the door to the possibility that Suetonius may have confused Christus for Chrestus.”[xi] On the contrary, Bart Ehrman notes that Suetonius is probably referencing an individual “Chrestus” and Jesus’ followers, since Jesus of the Gospels was executed twenty years prior to the riots.[xii] My conclusion rests on the possibility of a reference to Jesus Christ here, however advances no farther than speculative evidence.

Tacitus

As a Roman historian, Tacitus is most famously known for the Annals, which covers the Roman Empire from 14-68 C.E. and includes information about the reign of Nero. He records Nero’s probable arson of Rome in order to implement his own architectural designs and how he passed the blame to Christians as a ready scapegoat. As a result of this blame, Nero heatedly persecuted Christians and Tacitus wrote the following about this, “But neither human effort nor the emperor’s generosity nor the placating of the gods ended the scandalous belief that the fire had been ordered. Therefore, to put down the rumor, Nero substituted as culprits and punished in the most unusual ways those hated for their shameful acts, whom the crowd called “Chrestians.” The founder of this name, Christ, had been executed in the reign of Tiberius by the procurator Pontius Pilate.”[xiii]

Indeed, emperor Nero used Christians as a scapegoat to explain the fire, which broke out in Rome (64 A.D.). Tacitus mentions that the Christians were likely not the cause of the fire, but used the fire as an excuse to persecute Christians. The Annals do not prove that Jesus Christ existed but merely that Christians existed in the First Century A.D., which no scholar has ever disputed. Since Tacitus recorded The Annals one hundred years after Jesus’ proposed existence, this lacks historical reliability. It is important to remember that the negative evidence cited above is not “absence of evidence,” but rather “evidence of absence.” In science, negative evidence is often as important as positive evidence.

Josephus:

As a Jewish historian, Josephus briefly mentions Jesus two times in the Antiquities. Josephus mentions James “the brother of Jesus who is called Messiah” (Ant. 20.9.1). While Josephus does discuss many individuals with the name Jesus in the Antiquities, he does not refer to any of them as “Messiah.” I believe this is a reference to the Jesus of the Gospels since no other Jesus was associated with “Messiah” or called by its definition, “the anointed one.” While I grant this as a reference to Jesus of the Gospels, the credibility of this reference remains highly contestable.

For instance, Josephus’ other reference has him professing faith in Jesus, calling him Messiah when Josephus never became a Christian in the first place. “Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.”

Since Christian scribes copied Josephus’ writings through the Middle Ages, it is controversial whether his references to Jesus were altered or not. While Christians quote this passage as reliable evidence to Jesus’ existence, teachings, and resurrection, these references did not show up in the writings of Josephus until centuries after his death, at the beginning of the fourth century. Thoroughly dishonest church historian Eusebius is credited as the real author. The passage is out of context, which points to text alteration. All scholars agree that Josephus, a Jew who never converted to Christianity, would not have called Jesus “the Christ” or “the truth,” so the passage must have been doctored by a later Christian–evidence, by the way, that some early believers were in the habit of altering texts to the advantage of their theological agenda. The phrase “to this day” reveals it was written at a later time. Everyone agrees there was no “tribe of Christians” during the time of Josephus–Christianity did not get off the ground until the second century.

If Jesus were truly important to history, then Josephus should have told us something about him. Yet he is completely silent about the supposed miracles and deeds of Jesus. He adds nothing to the Gospel narratives and tells us nothing that would not have been known by Christians in either the first or fourth centuries. The paragraph mentions that the divine prophets foretold Jesus, but Josephus does not tell what they said or us who those prophets were. If Jesus had truly been the fulfillment of Jewish prophecy, then Josephus would have been the exact person to confirm it.

[ii] Ilbid, 21

[iii] Ilbid, 21

[iv] Ilbid, 23

[v] Ilbid, 25

[vi] Ilbid, 26

[vii] Ilbid, 29

[viii] Ilbid, 29

[ix] Ilbid, 30

[x] Ilbid, 31

[xi] Ilbid, 33

[xii] Ehrman, Bart. 2001. Jesus, Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 58

[xiii] VanVoorst, Robert. 2000. Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence. Grand Rapids, MI: Erdmans, 41

(Sarah Schoonmaker is completing her second BA in philosophy at the University of Colorado–Denver after receiving a BSBA in Finance from the University of Denver and an M.Div from Denver Seminary. She plans to begin a Ph.D program in the fall of 2010 to study philosophy of science, philosophy of language, logic, and epistemology. In the meantime, she researches and writes on a variety of topics covering religion, science, culture, and philosophy. For more information see: www.schoonmaker.wordpress.com.)

Yesterday I finished the Reading List Exams for U of T’s MA in Classics.  This was the conclusion of four days of intensity and spilling forth from my brain excessive amounts of information, some of which I wasn’t even sure was there until the pen hit the paper.  The Reading List looks like this.  My week looked like this:

Tuesday, 9:00 AM: Greek Verse translation exam.  Translate 2 out of 4 from Set A and likewise from Set B.  Passages taken from the Reading List, of course.  Did the passages from the Iliad, Hesiod’s Theogony, Tyrtaeus 9, Callimachus’ Hymn to Athena.

Wednesday, 9:00 AM: Greek Verse commentary exam.  Theoretically write something clever about 3 out 5 passages from sets A and B.  Only Emilia looks at it and says, “Hey, Set B only has four passages!”  Set A was similar.  Wrote the exam under much stress, wondering what would happen in these unforeseen circumstances.  Furthermore, would they discipline a prof who acts in such bad faith yet who is also published and publishing?  Commented on passages from Euripides’ Bacchae, the Homeric Hymn to Demeter, and Homer’s Odyssey, book 6 from Set A, and Mimnermus, Sappho 31, and the parabasis of Aristophanes’ Acharnians.

Thursday, 9:00 AM:  Latin Prose translation exam.  Same format as Greek.  Translated passages from Livy, Ab Urbe Condita Book 21, Suetonius Life of the Divine Julius, Cicero, and from a letter of Pliny the Younger.

Friday, 9:00 AM:  Latin Prose commentary exam.  Same format that Greek was supposed to be, not what Greek was. Thankfully.  Commented on passages from Cornelius Nepos’ Life of Atticus, Sallust’s Bellum Catilinae, Livy Book 1, a letter of Cicero to Atticus, Seneca Letter 47, and Cicero’s speech Pro Archia.

And now, I’m done the Reading List!

It seems bizarre to many that some people believe that Jesus never existed. Not Jesus the figure of faith, miracle working Son of God – nope – even a historical holy man Jesus, who inspired the stories in the bible. Many honestly believe it is all made up. They are almost certainly wrong, and this is probably down to peoples lack of understanding of how historians work. This is not a religious question, not one of faith, but one of history, and historians atheist, Jewish, Hindu or Christian can all agree on this.  Hey, let me start at the beginning…

Spending a lot of time as I do chatting on hard core sceptic and atheist forums (and yes I’m a sceptic myself, but a Christian as it happens) I was increasingly bewildered in the middle years of this decade to find a massive upswing in the belief that Jesus who inspired the Christian faith never existed, but was a mythical construct, or based on earlier pagan redeemer figures. This is a position taken seriously by no mainstream historian, and complete rot, but after the QI Christmas special in which the usual Mithras crap was spouted and Stephen Fry put attempts to put the record straight down to Christian propaganda I was outraged enough to become combative and actually engage the “Christ Mythers”, that is not Christians, but people who deny there was a Historical Jesus.

I was astonished by the vehemence, ignorance and appallingly bad scholarship which met my early attempts, though the JREF forum (James Randi Educational Foundation Forum) had long since been a place where this nonsense was attacked, as befits a sceptical community, and after  a couple of years anyone arguing it on Richard Dawkins forum is likely to get shot down – but the real change there came where Timothy O Neil an Australian atheist joined me and made a principled stand against this nonsense.

* Pliny the Younger, writing in Bithynia c.111AD Pliny is concerned about how to handle an outbreak of Christianity in his region. He writes to the Emperor Trajan, and the relevant part for our inquiry is

“They asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so. When this was over, it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of food–but ordinary and innocent food. Even this, they affirmed, they had ceased to do after my edict by which, in accordance with your instructions, I had forbidden political associations. Accordingly, I judged it all the more necessary to find out what the truth was by torturing two female slaves who were called deaconesses. But I discovered nothing else but depraved, excessive superstition.

This merely shows Christ was worshiped in Asia Minor, and a reference later in the letter says that some has apostatized up to twenty five years before, so the churches were established there by c.85AD, and probably before. I don’t think Paul ever got this far north.

You can read the whole letter (and Trajan’s response) here

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/pliny1.html

and the excellent historical resource Peter Kirby’s Early Christian Writings website has a couple of links to articles on this letter.

http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/pliny.html

Trajan’s response was

“You observed proper procedure, my dear Pliny, in sifting the cases of those who had been denounced to you as Christians. For it is not possible to lay down any general rule to serve as a kind of fixed standard. They are not to be sought out; if they are denounced and proved guilty, they are to be punished, with this reservation, that whoever denies that he is a Christian and really proves it–that is, by worshiping our gods–even though he was under suspicion in the past, shall obtain pardon through repentance. But anonymously posted accusations ought to have no place in any prosecution. For this is both a dangerous kind of precedent and out of keeping with the spirit of our age.”

It seems that Trajan was well aware of Christians, and that some persecution occurred presumably as a threat to the State through their “atheism” as it was usually termed. Beyond establishing that Christ was worshiped as God this comparatively early stage, it leads us no closer to the Historical Jesus, but it seemed as good a point as any to begin!

Let’s move on to Suetonius, 115CE

Early Christian Writings  ( http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/suetonius.html )  is excellent as usual here – so it seems pointless for me to rehash what is said already there.

Suetonius wrote in The Life of Claudius (25.4)

“As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome.”

He also notes the presence of Christians -

“Punishment by Nero was inflicted on the Christians, a class of men given to a new and mischievous superstition “

Now Claudius from 41 to 54CE, so is this Chrestus actually Christus, Christ? Did rows in the synagogue (and recall Christianity was still part of Judaism at this point) lead to the expulsion? It seems not unlikely, and agrees with the account in Acts. Traditionally dated to 49CE, this event is probably within twenty years of the crucifixion so very early – but its not certain. the instigation of Chrestus seems to imply someone alive, but if Suetonius who was writing some seventy years later was using a lost source, it would be an easy mistake to make. I think this probably does represent the earliest Christian missions to Rome – and yet again, it brings us no closer to the Historical Jesus…

Nero ruled from 54 to 68CE. As we shall see other references exist tot he Christian community in his reign in Rome.

Tacitus, Annals – c.115AD

Annals, 15:44

Such indeed were the precautions of human wisdom. The next thing was to seek means of propitiating the gods, and recourse was had to the Sibylline books, by the direction of which prayers were offered to Vulcanus, Ceres, and Proserpina. Juno, too, was entreated by the matrons, first, in the Capitol, then on the nearest part of the coast, whence water was procured to sprinkle the fane and image of the goddess. And there were sacred banquets and nightly vigils celebrated by married women. But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order. Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace.  Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man’s cruelty, that they were being destroyed.”

It probably goes without saying that Early Christian Writings is the best place http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/tacitus.html to start your evaluation.

The possibility this is a Christian interpolation strikes me as highly unlikely – we have an independent reference to Neronic persecution in Suetonius (see above) and it is very unflattering.  However none of the Christian Church Fathers make mention of it  .  It strikes me as entirely probable.   Note Pilate is described as a Procurator, but in fact was a Proconsul, a simple enough error, Tacitus using a contemporary title resulting in this anachronism.

The absolutely central issue here is where Tacitus got his information from.  It may well have been a Roman source, as Christian sources are unlikely to express these kinds of feelings, and Tacitus appears to have despised Christians. One can’t help feel Tacitus had some early reference from which he worked for the Neronic persecution at least — the references to public sympathy brought about by the persecution have that feel.

A common claim I often see is that it is odd that none of the Church Fathers mention the Neronic persecution (they do) or Tacitus’ mention of it. I may as well address it briefly here before proceeding.

Eusebius cites the Church Father, Tertullian (155-230), Defence 5

“Study your records: there you will find that Nero was the first to persecute this teaching when, after subjugating the entire East, in Rome he especially he treated everyone with savagery. That such a man was author of our chastisement fills us with pride.  For anyone who knows him knows him can understand that anything not supremely good would never have been condemned by Nero.”

I think that Tertullian is here drawing directly on Tacitus, and his account (cited above) of the Neronic persecution.  I may be wrong, but “Study your records” implies that Tertullian was referring to a Roman authority, and Suetonius or Tacitus fit the bill, and Tacitus best.

Phlegon of Tralles, c130-160??? EDIT: or possibly much earlier, writing circa 80CE – see links for detailed discussion.

Jerome  wrote –
Jesus Christ, according to the prophecies which had been foretold about him beforehand, came to his passion in the eighteenth year of Tiberius, at which time also we find these things written verbatim in other commentaries of the gentiles, that an eclipse of the sun happened, Bithynia was shaken by earthquake, and in the city of Nicaea many buildings collapsed, all of which agree with what occurred in the passion of the savior. Indeed Phlegon, who is an excellent calculator of olympiads, also writes about these things, writing thus in his thirteenth book:

(Phlegon) – “In the fourth year, however, of olympiad 202,* an eclipse of the sun happened, greater and more excellent than any that had happened before it; at the sixth hour, day turned into dark night, so that the stars were seen in the sky, and an earthquake in Bithynia toppled many buildings of the city of Nicaea. These things [are according to] the aforementioned man.”

The events referred to are from 32CE, a possible date for the Crucifixion and darkening of the sky.  Yet in Jerome’s translation Jesus is never mentioned!  My suspicion is that he was referring to Jesus, and that Jerome was honest here, as that is his implication. However Phlegon was clearly extremely credulous and loved fortean phenomena – see his

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phlegon_of_Tralles – Wikipedia entry
, so I hesitate to put much emphasis on him.  Still he mentioned Jesus and prophecies fulfilled, and was a secular historian.  Good technical discussion complete with excellent links and analysis to be found on Textcavation –

http://www.textexcavation.com/phlegontestimonium.htm

This brings us to Thallus, writing somewhere between 50 and 150CE

The key passage here by being quoted by Julius Africanus  in alost work, but quoted by George Syncellus in a 9th century text! Does not inspire confidence does it, but very normal for recovering historical data

Here is the passage from Africanus –

“A most terrible darkness fell over all the world, the rocks were torn apart by an earthquake, and many places both in Judaea and the rest of the world were thrown down. In the third book of his Histories Thallus dismisses this darkness as a solar eclipse, unreasonably, as it seems to me. For the Hebrews celebrate the Passover on Luna 14, and what happened to the Saviour occurred one day before the Passover. But an eclipse of the sun takes place when the moon passes under the sun. The only time when this can happen is in the interval between the first day of the new moon and the last day of the old moon, when they are in conjunction. How then could one believe an eclipse took place when the moon was almost in opposition to the sun? So be it. Let what had happened beguile the masses, and let this wonderful sign to the world be considered a solar eclipse through an optical [illusion]. Phlegon records that during the reign of Tiberius Caesar there was a complete solar eclipse at full moon from the sixth to the ninth hour; it is clear that this is the one. But what have eclipses to do with an earthquake, rocks breaking apart, resurrection of the dead, and a universal disturbance of this nature”

There are three good sources for study of this – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thallus_%28historian%29 Wikipedia is succinct and good , but also see

http://www.textexcavation.com/thallustestimonium.html

Textcavation and for all you atheists out there the generally very sound  Richard Carrier.

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/thallus.html

I don’t aim to make any real judgements myself at this point, just chronicle the key texts,  but I will end here for today. More tonight or tomorrow!

cj x

The Gelderse IJssel

The Canal of Drusus is mentioned by Suetonius (Claudius, 1) and Tacitus (Annals, II.8); it appears that it was dug when the Roman general Drusus campaigned east and north of the Rhine in 12-9 BCE. There have been several theories about its location, one of them being that it is identical to the river Vecht, another stressing that both Suetonius and Tacitus use a plural, and that a second canal had to exist, which was localised between Lake Flevo (the modern IJsselmeer) and the Wadden Sea.

The consensus, however, was that the Canal of Drusus connected the Rhine to the IJssel, and was identical to the water course between modern Arnhem and Doesburg, now called Gelderse IJssel. The main argument was that a monument known as Drusus’ Mole can be found a bit east of this watercourse, at Herwen (ancient Carvium).

This hypothesis now turns out to be incorrect. In a recent article in the Netherlands Journal of Geosciences 87/4 (2008 ) by B. Makaske, G.J. Maas & D.G. van Smeerdijk, “The age and origin of the Gelderse IJssel“, radiocarbon data are mentioned that date the oldest part of the Gelderse IJssel to the tenth century. Of course, it remains possible that the Canal was between Arnhem and Doesburg, later changed its course, and that the samples were taken from this new meander.

Early on in the fascinating Chronicles: Volume One (2004) Bob Dylan describes the library in the home of a New York acquaintance:

There were all types of things in here, books on typography, epigraphy, philosophy, political ideologies. The stuff that could make you bugged-eyed. Books like Fox’s Book of Martyrs, The Twelve Caesars, Tacitus lectures and letters to Brutus. Pericles’ Ideal State of Democracy, Thucydides’ The Athenian General – a narrative which would give you chills. It was written four hundred years before Christ and it talks about how human nature is always the enemy of anything superior. Thucydides writes about how words in his time have changed from their ordinary meaning, how actions and opinions can be altered in the blink of an eye. It’s like nothing has changed from his time to mine. [page 36]

Thucydides evidently made a lasting impression on Dylan (the passage seems to refer to the early 60s). Of some other books in the library he notes “This stuff pales in comparison to Thucydides” [37]. While Dylan clearly read Thucydides – the reference to words changing their meaning comes from the account of a civil war at Corcyra (book 3, section 82) – it is curious that Dylan gets the titles wrong. Thucydides, though he was an Athenian general, did not write a book called The Athenian General. He wrote a history the Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta in the late 5th century BCE. Furthermore, there is no book by Pericles called Ideal State of Democracy, though Thucydides’ history does contain speeches, attributed to Pericles, discussing Athenian democracy. The Twelve Caesars is a real book (by Suetonius) but what are Tacitus’ lectures? As for the letters to Brutus, presumably that’s a reference to one of Cicero’s works. Inaccuracies aside, it is worth noting that Thucydides (and some other classical authors) apparently had a substantial impact on one of the foremost twentieth century songwriters.

The city of Rome was powerful. And its military generals were powerful. But they obeyed the law and kept their armies away from the city. At least they did until Julius Caesar, commanded to surrender his post, instead crossed the Rubicon River on this day in 49B.C. and led his Roman army into Rome itself.

Suetonius, a Roman historian under the Emperor Hadrian, recounts the episode this way:

“Coming up with his troops on the banks of the Rubicon, which was the frontier of his province, he halted for a while, and revolving in his mind the importance of the step he meditated, he turned to those about him, saying: ‘Still we can retreat! But once let us pass this little bridge, and nothing is left but to fight it out with arms!’

“Then sounding the ‘Advance!’ with a piercing blast he crossed to the other side. At this Caesar cried out, ‘Let us go where the omens of the gods and the crimes of our enemies summon us! THE DIE IS NOW CAST!’

He crossed the point of no return and led the Roman Republic down the road to becoming the mighty Roman Empire, changing the world forever.

Somehow, I find comfort in his hesitation.

The deeper we go into the Bible and Study the Scriptures, the more we will find slight interpretation. Many churches and denominations have based an entire belief over just a few verses that, when put in the right order, seem to suggest a “secret” that most people glaze over. Occasionally, there is more Scriptural evidence and example to back up these thoughts. Other times, not. One of the biggest fought over ideas is whether or not Jesus was who the church claims He is. Even there, many are divided on just who Jesus really was, and whether or not He still is.

The name given to the three-pronged godhead is the Trinity. And that is where the opinion splits. Some don’t believe that there is a Trinity, while others believe there must be. Yet the degree to which each member of the Trinity is not agreed upon either. [1]

In some cases, people believe that there is only Jesus. He is the Father and He is the Holy Spirit. There is absolutely no distinction between the three. They are the same “person”. This is to say that while Jesus was on the earth, there was no Father in heaven, because Jesus is the Father. [1]

Some believe that Jesus was just a prophet, a man through whom God spoke. Someone who taught us how to live well and follow the teachings of God’s Law. He wasn’t the Son of God, but just someone on God’s team. [2]

Still others believe that Jesus was merely a great orator. He spoke fancy words and convinced people to things His way, but they maintain that He couldn’t have been real since there is no God who could’ve sent Him. [3]

The most ignorant of all don’t believe that Jesus is real. They say that some people invented the idea of Jesus just to scare people into being what they call “good”. These people are living with a distorted perception. There really is no doubting that Jesus lived, walked the earth, taught people and was killed for His ways. [4]

The real question here is not whether Jesus exists (or existed), but the real question is: Who is Jesus? God in entirety? Son of God? Prophet? Teacher? Heretic? I attempt to answer these questions with the oldest and most trustworthy record of the time that these events occurred, some 2000 years ago. I refer, of course, to the Bible.

1. As to the fact that there is a separation between the Father, Son, and Spirit: All three are God, and yet each is unique in His place, position and duties.

• No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father. –Mark 13:32
  • If Jesus admitted to not knowing what only the Father knew, He couldn’t be the Father Himself.
• Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. –Matthew 28:19
  • Jesus’ command was to make disciples in the name of all three members of the godhead.
• As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him. And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.” –Matthew 3:16-17
  • In this depiction, the Son, Jesus, is present alongside the manifestation of the Holy Spirit and the voice of the Father is heard from heaven. All three are shown separate, so Jesus cannot be the Spirit or the Father. The Spirit cannot be the Son or the Father and the Father cannot be the Son or the Spirit. Here are a few more verses that point to a separation of the three-pronged Godhead if you wish to look them up.
• Genesis 1:26
• Genesis 3:22
• Isaiah 6:3 & 8
• Isaiah 11:2-3 
• Isaiah 42:1
• Isaiah 48:16
• Isaiah 63:10-11
• Matthew 3:11
• Matthew 12:28
• Luke 4:1 & 14
• John 3:34-35
• John 14:26
• John 15:26
• John 16:13
• Acts 10:38
• 2 Corinthians 13:14
• 1 Peter 1:2
• 1 John 5:5-11

2. To the point that some say Jesus was not the Son of God, there is quite a bit of Scriptural evidence to the contrary.

• Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the desert to be tempted by the devil. After fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. The tempter came to him and said, “If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.” Matthew 4:1-3
  • Even Satan knows that Jesus is the Son of God. That’s why Satan hoped to tempt Jesus to slip up in any small way. Of course, it didn’t work.
• The high priest said to him, “I charge you under oath by the living God: Tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God.” “Yes, it is as you say,” Jesus replied. “But I say to all of you: In the future you will see the Son of Man sitting at the right hand of the Mighty One and coming on the clouds of heaven.” – Matthew 26:63-64
  • Here, Jesus admits to the high priest that He is indeed the Son of God.
• As soon as Jesus was baptized, he went up out of the water. At that moment heaven was opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and lighting on him. And a voice from heaven said, “This is my Son, whom I love; with him I am well pleased.” –Matthew 3:16-17
  • Again, this reveals to be an important passage. God the Father audibly tells everyone within earshot that Jesus is indeed His Son. I have again included a list of other references to Jesus as the Son of God.
• Matthew 4:6
• Matthew 8:29
• Matthew 14:33
• Matthew 27:40, 43, 54
• Mark 1:1
• Mark 3:11
• Mark 15:39
• Luke 1:35
• Luke 3:38
• Luke 4:3 , 9, 41
• Luke 22:70
• John 1:34, 49
• John 5:25
• John 11:27
• John 19:7
• John 20:31
• Acts 9:20
• Romans 1:4
• 2 Corinthians 1:19
• Galatians 2:20
• Ephesians 4:13
• Hebrews 4:14
• Hebrews 6:6
• Hebrews 7:3
• Hebrews 10:29
• 1 John 3:8
• 1 John 4:15
• 1 John 5:1, 5, 10, 12-13, 20
• Revelation 2:18

3. This point is intimately more problematic than most others. To believe that Jesus is God’s Son, you must first believe in God. These verses and facts show that what the Bible says is real. God created the earth and sent His Son Jesus to earth for us. I also list quite a bit of science here, so feel free to browse the topics in bold.

·         Formation of Life: Dead chemicals cannot become alive on their own. The cell is a miniature factory with many active processes, not a simple blob of “protoplasm” as believed in Darwin’s day. Lightening striking a mud puddle or some “warm little pond” will never produce life. This is another view of the core issue of information as the simplest living cell requires a vast amount of information to be present. The “Law of Biogenesis” states that life comes only from prior life. Spontaneous generation has long been shown to be impossible (by Louis Pasteur in 1859). Numerous efforts to bring life from non-life (including the famous Miller-Urey experiment) have not succeeded. The probability of life forming from non-life has been likened to the probability of a tornado going through a junkyard and spontaneously assembling a working 747 airplane. The idea that life on earth may have been seeded from outer space just moves the problem elsewhere.

o         Key reference: Why Abiogenesis is Impossible, Jerry Bergman, CRS Quarterly, Volume 36, March 2000

·         Design of Living Things: Design is apparent in the living world. Even Richard Dawkins in his anti-creation book The Blind Watchmaker admits “Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose.” The amazing defense mechanism of the Bombardier Beetle is a classic example of design in nature, seemingly impossible to explain as the result of accumulating small beneficial changes over time, because if the mechanism doesn’t work perfectly, “boom” – no more beetle! This is also another view of the core issue of information, as the design of living things is the result of processing the information in the DNA (following the blueprint) to produce a working organism.

o         Key reference: The three-part video series Incredible Creatures that Defy Evolution describes many more examples like that of the Bombardier Beetle

·         Irreducible Complexity: The idea that “nothing works until everything works.” The classic example is a mousetrap, which is irreducibly complex in that if one of its several pieces is missing or not in the right place, it will not function as a mousetrap and no mice will be caught. The systems, features, and processes of life are irreducibly complex. What good is a circulatory system without a heart? An eye without a brain to interpret the signals? What good is a half-formed wing? Doesn’t matching male and female reproductive machinery need to exist at the same time, fully-functioning if any reproduction is to take place? Remember, natural selection has no foresight, and works to eliminate anything not providing an immediate benefit.

o         Key Reference: Darwin’s Black Box (Behe)

·         Second Law of Thermodynamics: The Second Law of Thermodynamics refers to the universal tendency for things, on their own, to “mix” with their surrounding environment over time, becoming less ordered and eventually reaching a steady-state. A glass of hot water becomes room temperature, buildings decay into rubble, and the stars will eventually burn out leading to the “heat death” of the universe. However, the evolutionary scenario proposes that over time things, on their own, became more ordered and structured. Somehow the energy of a “Big Bang” structured itself into stars, galaxies, planets, and living things, contrary to the Second Law. It is sometimes said that the energy of the Sun was enough to overcome this tendency and allow for the formation of life on earth. However, application of energy alone is not enough to overcome this tendency; the energy must be channeled by a machine. A human must repair a building to keep it from decaying. Likewise, it is the machinery of photosynthesis which harnesses the energy of the Sun, allowing life to exist, and photosynthesis is itself a complex chemical process. The maturing of an acorn into a tree, or a zygote (the first cell resulting from fertilization) into a mature human being does not violate the Second Law as these processes are guided by the information already present in the acorn or zygote.

o         Key reference: The Second Law of Thermodynamics (answersingenesis.org)

·         Existence of the Universe: By definition, something must be eternal (as we have “something” today and something cannot come from “nothing”, so there was never a time when there was “nothing”). Either the universe itself is eternal, or something/someone outside of and greater than the universe is eternal. We know that the universe is not eternal, it had a beginning (as evidenced by its expansion). Therefore, God (the something/someone outside of the universe) must exist and must have created the universe. Einstein showed that space and time are related. If there is no space there is no time. Before the universe was created there was no space and therefore no concept of time. This is hard for us to understand as we are space-time creatures, but it allows for God to be an eternal being, completely consistent with scientific laws. The question “who created God” is therefore an improper/invalid question, as it is a time-based question (concerning the point in time at which God came into existence) but God exists outside of time as the un-caused first cause.

·         Fine-Tuning of Earth for Life: Dozens of parameters are “just right” for life to exist on this planet. For example, if the Earth were just a little closer to the Sun it would be too hot and the ocean’s water would boil away, much further and it would be covered continually in ice. Earth’s circular orbit (to maintain a roughly constant temperature year-round), its rotation speed (to provide days and nights not too long or short), its tilt (to provide seasons), and the presence of the moon (to provide tides to cleanse the oceans) are just some of many other examples.

The presence of large amounts of water, with its amazing special properties, is also required. Water is a rare compound in that it is lighter in a solid state than in a liquid state. This allows ponds to freeze with the ice on the surface allowing the life beneath to survive. Otherwise bodies of water would freeze from the bottom up and become solid ice. Water is also the most universal “solvent” known, allowing for dissolving/mixing with the many different chemicals of life. In fact, our bodies are 75-85% comprised of water.

o         Key reference: The Privileged Planet (Gonzalez/Richards)

·         Fine-Tuning of Physics: The fine-tuning of the physical constants that control the physics of the universe – the settings of the basic forces (strong nuclear force constant, weak nuclear force constant, gravitational force constant, and electromagnetic force constant) are on a knife’s edge. A minor change in these or any of dozens of other universal parameters would make life impossible. The “multiverse” idea that there may be many universes and ours “just happened” to have these proper values is outside of science and could never be proven. Even then we would have to ask “what was the cause of all these universes?”

o       Key reference: Hugh Ross lists about 100 parameters on the Reasons To Believe web site. See also Design and the Anthropic Principle

·         Abrupt Appearance in the Fossil Record: The oldest fossils for any creature are already fully-formed and don’t change much over time (“stasis”). The “Cambrian Explosion” in the “primordial strata” documents the geologically rapid appearance of most major groups of complex animals. There is no evidence of evolution from simpler forms. Birds are said to have evolved from reptiles but no fossil has ever been found having a “half-scale/half-wing”. A reptile breathes using an “in and out” lung (like humans have), but a bird has a “flow-through” lung suitable for moving through the air. Can you even imagine how such a transition of the lung could have taken place? Abrupt appearance and stasis are consistent with the biblical concept of creation “according to its kind”, and a world-wide flood that scoured the earth down to its basement rocks, depositing the “geologic column” and giving the appearance of a “Cambrian Explosion”. Smarter, more mobile creatures would escape the flood waters longer, becoming buried in higher-level strata, leading to a burial order progressing from “simpler” forms to more complex/higher-level forms, which people now wrongly interpret as an evolutionary progression.

o       Key reference: Fossils Q&A (answersingenesis.org)

·         Human Consciousness: A person is a unity of body + mind/soul, the mind/soul being the immaterial part of you that is the real inner you. Chemicals alone cannot explain self-awareness, creativity, reasoning, emotions of love and hate, sensations of pleasure and pain, possessing and remembering experiences, and free will. Reason itself cannot be relied upon if it is based only on blind neurological events.

o       Key reference: The Origin of the Brain and Mind, Brad Harrub and Bert Thompson, CRS Quarterly, Volume 41, June 2004

·         Human Language: Language is one of the main things that separates man from the animals. No animal is capable of achieving anything like human speech, and all attempts to teach chimpanzees to talk have failed. Evolutionists have no explanation for the origin of human language. However, the Bible does. It says that the first man, Adam, was created able to speak. The Bible also explains why we have different human languages, as God had to “confuse” the common language being used in Babel after the flood, in order to force people to spread out around the world as He wanted. This was only a “surface” confusion though, as all languages express the same underlying basic ideas and concepts, enabling other languages to be learned and understood.

o       Key reference: The Mystery of Human Language (Morris, icr.org)

·         Sexual Reproduction: Many creatures reproduce asexually. Why would animals abandon simpler asexual reproduction in favor of more costly and inefficient sexual reproduction? Sexual reproduction is a very complex process that is only useful if fully in place. For sexual reproduction to have evolved complimentary male and female sex organs, sperm and eggs, and all the associated machinery in tandem defies the imagination.

·         The Bible’s Witness: The Bible is true. The history of the Bible is true. The words of the Bible concerning our origins were given to men to write down, by God, who was the only living being present. We were not there! God said He created the universe. God said He created all living things. We know that life is much more than chemicals. God put His life into Adam and that life has been transferred from generation to generation all the way down to us!

o       Key reference: The New Evidence That Demands a Verdict (McDowell)

·         Other Scientific evidence would point out that, at the rate of the magnetic field’s decay, sedimentary layering, population statistics, radio halos, the atmospheric helium content, expansion of space fabric, and the design of both living systems and of the human brain. Some points on these below:

o        Earth’s Magnetic Field Decay: Dr. Thomas Barnes, Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of Texas at El Paso, has published the definitive work in this field.⁴ Scientific observations since 1829 have shown that the earth’s magnetic field has been measurably decaying at an exponential rate, demonstrating its half-life to be approximately 1,400 years. In practical application its strength 20,000 years ago would approximate that of a magnetic star. Under those conditions many of the atoms necessary for life processes could not form. These data demonstrate that earth’s entire history is young, within a few thousand of years

^o          Global Flood: The Biblical record clearly describes a global Flood during Noah’s day. Additionally, there are hundreds of Flood traditions handed down through cultures all over the world. ⁵ M.E. Clark and Henry Voss have demonstrated the scientific validity of such a Flood providing the sedimentary layering we see on every continent. ⁶ Secular scholars report very rapid sedimentation and periods of great carbonate deposition in earth’s sedimentary layers..⁷ It is now possible to prove the historical reality of the Biblical Flood.⁸

o        Population Statistics: World population growth rate in recent times is about 2% per year. Practicable application of growth rate throughout human history would be about half that number. Wars, disease, famine, etc. have wiped out approximately one third of the population on average every 82 years. Starting with eight people, and applying these growth rates since the Flood of Noah’s day (about 4500 years ago) would give a total human population at just under six billion people. However, application on an evolutionary time scale runs into major difficulties. Starting with one “couple” just 41,000 years ago would give us a total population of 2 x 10⁸⁹. ⁹The universe does not have space to hold so many bodies.

o        Radio Halos: Physicist Robert Gentry has reported isolated radio halos of polonuim-214 in crystalline granite. The half-life of this element is 0.000164 seconds! To record the existence of this element in such short time span, the granite must be in crystalline state instantaneously.¹⁰ This runs counter to evolutionary estimates of 300 million years for granite to form. Recently there have been evolutionists online in newsgroups and on blogs that have claimed Polonium 214 doesn’t exist. Main reason being is because they declare the Granite in the earth’s crust took many millions of years to form and finally cool and Polonium 214 takes less then a second to expend all its half-lifes. In order to save face, some evolutionists have decided to lie and say Polonium 214 simply doesn’t exist. HOWEVER, if you go to http://www.scorecard.org/chemical-profiles/summary.tcl?edf_substance_id=15735%2d67%2d8, you will see one of many online Scientific websites that list the element Pulonium 214 to be found on Planet earth. On that page they share evidence that Polonium 214 is in fact a chemical profile that can and has been recorded by many scientists. Praise the Lord we have yet another factoid to prove evolution is a lie of Satan.

o        Atmospheric Helium Content: Physicist Melvin Cook, Nobel Prize medalist found that helium-4 enters our atmosphere from solar wind and radioactive decay of uranium. At present rates our atmosphere would accumulate current helium-4 amounts in less than 10,000 years.¹²

o        Expansion of Space Fabric: Astronomical estimates of the distance to various galaxies gives conflicting data. ¹³The Biblical Record refers to the expansion of space by the Creator14. Astrophysicist Russell Humphries demonstrates that such space expansion would dilate time in distant space.¹⁵ This could explain a recent creation with great distances to the stars

o        Design of Living Systems: A living cell is so awesomely complex that its interdependent components stagger the imagination and defy evolutionary explanations. A minimal cell contains over 60,000 proteins of 100 different configurations.¹⁶ The chance of this assemblage occurring by chance is 1 in 10 ^4,478,296 .¹⁷

o        Design of the Human Brain: The human brain is the most complicated structure in the known universe.¹⁸ It contains over 100 billion cells, each with over 50,000 neuron connections to other brain cells.¹⁹ This structure receives over 100 million separate signals from the total human body every second. If we learned something new every second of our lives, it would take three million years to exhaust the capacity of the human brain. ²⁰ In addition to conscious thought, people can actually reason, anticipate consequences, and devise plans – all without knowing they are doing so.²¹

§   *References for the above 21 notations (1-3 not used above, but are still great references to the same conclusions):

·   ¹Woodmorappe, John, “The Essential Non-Existence of the Evolutionary Uniformitarian Geologic Column: A Quantitative Assessment,” Creation Research Society Quarterly, vol. 18, no.1 (Terre Haute, Indiana, June 1981),pp. 46-71

·   ² Nilsson, N. Heribert, as quoted in Arthur C. Custance, The Earth Before Man, Part II, Doorway Papers, no. 20 (Ontario, Canada: Doorway Publications), p. 51

·   ³Corner, E.J.H., Contemporary Botanical Thought, ed. A.M. MacLeod and L.S. Cobley (Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1961), p. 97

·   ⁴Barnes, Thomas, ICR Technical Monograph #4, Origin and Destiny of the Earth’s Magnetic Field (2^nd edition, 1983)

·   ⁵Blick, Edward, A Scientific Analysis of Genesis (Oklahoma City: Hearthstone, 1991) p. 103

·   ⁶Clark, M.E. and Voss, H.D., “Fluid Mechanic Examination of the Tial Mechanism for Producing Mega-Sedimantary Layering” (Third International Conference on Creation, Pittsburg, July 1994)

·   ⁷Ager, Derek, The Nature of the Stratigraphical Record (New York: John Wiley and Sons) p. 43 and p. 86

·   ⁸West, John Anthony, Serpent in the Sky: The High Wisdom of Ancient Egypt (New York: Julian Press, 1987) pp. 13-14

·   ⁹ See Morris, Henry, Scientific Creationism (El Cajon, CA: Master Books)

·   ¹⁰Gentry, Robert, Creation’s Tiny Mystery (Knoxville, Tenn.: Earth Science Assoc.,1988 )

·   ¹¹ Baugh, Carl, Why Do Men Believe Evolution AGAINST ALL ODDS? (Oklahoma City: Hearthstone, 1999)

·   ¹²Cook, Melvin, “Where is The Earth’s Radiogenic Helium?” Nature, Vol. 179, p. 213

·   ¹³Cowan, R., “Further Evidence of a Youthful Universe,” Science News, Vol. 148, p. 166

·   ¹⁴Psalm 104:2; Isaiah 40:22

·   ¹⁵Humphries, Russell, Starlight and Time (Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 1994)

·   ¹⁶Denton, Michael, Evolution: A Theory in Crisis (Bethesda, Maryland: Adler & Adler, 1986) p. 263

·   ¹⁷ Mastropaolo, Joseph, “Evolution Is Biologically Impossible,” Impact # 317 (El Cajon, CA: Institute For Creation Research,1999) p. 4

·   ¹⁸Restak, Richard, The Brain: The Last Frontier, 1979, p. 390

·   ¹⁹The Brain, Our Universe Within, PBS Video

·   ²⁰Wonders of God’s Creation, Moody Video Series

·   ²¹Weiss, Joseph, “Unconscious Mental Functioning,” Scientific American, March 1990, p. 103

4. Some would ask, “How is believing in God different than believing in Jesus?” In this context, many do believe in God the Father and Creator, but not that Jesus was His Son, or that He even existed.  Some of the evidence given to point 3 could be attributed to Jesus. The fact is, Jesus walked the earth. He spoke, He taught, He shook things up. There are a lot of Biblical New Testament examples of Jesus speaking to, and appearing before large groups of people in very public places. However, most non-believers exclude anything the Bible says automatically and without consideration of the many different peoples who penned the pages. Here are some of the extra-biblical references I’ve found:

·         Ask yourself: Could a person who never lived have affected human history so remarkably? The reference work The Historians’ History of the World observed: “The historical result of [Jesus'] activities was more momentous, even from a strictly secular standpoint, than the deeds of any other character of history. A new era, recognized by the chief civilizations of the world, dates from his birth.”
Critics, nevertheless, point out that all that we really know about Jesus is found in the Bible. No other contemporary records concerning him exist. But is this true?

Yes, think about it. Even calendars today are based on the year that Jesus was thought to have been born. “Dates before that year are listed as B.C., or before Christ,” explains The World Book Encyclopedia. “Dates after that year are listed as A.D., or anno Domini (in the year of our Lord).”

Although references to Jesus Christ by early secular historians are meager, such references do exist.

·         Cornelius Tacitus, a respected first-century Roman historian, wrote: “The name [Christian] is derived from Christ, whom the procurator Pontius Pilate had executed in the reign of Tiberius.” Tacitus lived from A.D. 55 to A.D. 120. He was a Roman historian and has been described as the greatest historian of Rome, noted for his integrity and moral uprightness. His most famous works are the Annals and the Histories. The Annals relate the historical narrative from Augustus’ death in A.D.14 to Nero’s death in A.D. 68. The Histories begin their narrative after Nero’s death and finish with Domitian’s death in A.D. 96. In his section describing Nero’s decision to blame the fire of Rome on the Christians, Tacitus affirms that the founder of Christianity, a man he calls Chrestus (a common misspelling of Christ, which was Jesus’ surname), was executed by Pilate, the procurator of Judea during the reign of the Roman emperor Tiberias. Tacitus was hostile to Christianity because in the same paragraph he describes Christus’ or Christ’s death, he describes Christianity as a pernicious superstition. It would have therefore been in his interests to declare that Jesus had never existed, but he did not, and perhaps he did not because he could not without betraying the historical record. See —THE COMPLETE WORKS OF TACITUS (NEW YORK, 1942), “THE ANNALS,” BOOK 15, PAR. 44.

·         Suetonius and Pliny the Younger, other Roman writers of the time, also referred to Christ. Suetonius was a Roman historian and a court official in Emperor Hadrian’s government. In his Life of Claudius he refers to Claudius expelling Jews from Rome on account of their activities on behalf of a man Suetonius calls Chrestus [another misspelling of Christus or Christ]. Pliny was the Governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor (AD. 112). He was responsible for executing Christians for not worshipping or bowing down to a statue of the emperor Trajan. In a letter to the emperor Trajan, he describes how the people on trial for being Christians would describe how they sang songs to Christ because he was a god.

·         Flavius Josephus, a first-century Jewish historian, wrote of the stoning of James*, whom he identified as “the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ.” Josephus was a Jewish historian who was born in either 37 or 38 AD and died some time after 100 AD. He wrote the Jewish Antiquites and in one famous passage described Jesus as a wise man, a doer of wonderful works and calls him the Christ. He also affirmed that Jesus was executed by Pilate and actually rose from the dead! (*THE JEWISH ANTIQUITIES, JOSEPHUS, BOOK XX, SEC. 200)

·         Lucian of Samosata was a Greek satirist of the latter half of the second century. He therefore lived within two hundred years of Jesus. Lucian was hostile to Christianity and openly mocked it. He particularly objected to the fact that Christians worshipped a man. He does not mention Jesus’ name, but the reference to the man Christians worship is a reference to Jesus.

·         Mara Bar-Serepion Some time after 70 A.D., Mara Bar-Sarapion (spelled either Se- or Sa-), who was probably a Stoic philosopher, wrote a letter to his son in which he describes how the Jews executed their King. Claiming to be a king was one of the charges the religious authorities used to scare Pontius Pilate into agreeing to execute Jesus.

·         Common Sense Factor: Why would apostles of Jesus allow themselves to martyred in such horrific ways if they knew Jesus wasn’t real? All except John were killed for their faith, each separate from one another. “EVIDENCE IN MUSEUM?”As it did with the Hebrew Scriptures, archaeology has brought to light many interesting artifacts in support of the inspired record contained in the Christian Greek Scriptures.
For instance– Pontius Pilate Inscription. It was in 1961 that the first archaeological find was made with reference to Pontius Pilate. ( the person who put Jesus to death) This was a stone slab located at Caesarea, which bore in Latin the name of Pontius Pilate
To mention only one, as there are literally hundreds of artifacts relating to everything Jesus said and did. All the people Jesus mentioned; there is proof they existed, all the places he said he visited, there is proof these places did exist, and so on.
To put is simply, if we are to doubt the historicity of Jesus, we must also doubt the historicity of ones like, Alexander the Great and Napoleon, as there is more evidence of Jesus existence than of theirs.

“BIBLE ALL HEARSAY, WHERES THE PROOF?”
How can we be sure the Bible has not been changed?

With reference to early non-Christian historical references to Jesus, THE NEW ENCYCLOPÆDIA BRITANNICA states: “These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus “(1976), MACROPÆDIA, VOL. 10, P. 145.

Not “hearsay”, here are some examples of why the Bible is believable as the Word of God—

1. It is filled with prophecies reflecting detailed knowledge of the future—something impossible for humans. Some of them have occurred, some are occurring, and some are yet to occur. Jesus fulfilled many of them Himself. Remember that the contents of the Bible was written during a span stretching over 1600 years.

2. Its contents are scientifically sound on matters that human researchers discovered only at a later date. One such example is the existence of King David. Many didn’t believe that such a man existed until the last couple hundred years, when more evidence was found to back his reign as king.

3. Its internal harmony is significant. The four gospels, for example, were written by different men at different times in different areas. They are not all filled with exactly the same stories and situations, but what is in one may be in another, and nothing in any is disproof of another’s writings. They tell thee same story from four different views.
Other aspects of Biblical harmony is shown by the fact that the books of the Bible were recorded by some 40 men as diverse as king, prophet, herdsman, tax collector, and physician. They did the writing over a period of 1,600+ years; so there was no opportunity for collusion. Yet their writings agree, even in the smallest details. This is further proved by the point that the Bible wasn’t “put together” as a whole until long after all pieces were written. To appreciate the extent to which the various portions of the Bible are harmoniously intertwined, you must read and study it personally.

“In the number of ancient MSS. [manuscripts] attesting a writing, and in the number of years that had elapsed between the original and the attesting MSS., the Bible enjoys a decided advantage over classical writings [those of Homer, Plato, and others]. . . . Altogether classical MSS. are but a handful compared with Biblical. No ancient book is so well attested as the Bible.”—The Bible From the Beginning (New York, 1929), P. Marion Simms, pp. 74, 76.

A report published in 1971 shows that there are possibly 6,000 handwritten copies containing all or part of the Hebrew Scriptures; the oldest dates back to the third century B.C.E. Of the Christian Greek Scriptures, there are some 5,000 in Greek, the oldest dating back to the beginning of the second century C.E. There are also many copies of early translations into other languages.

In the introduction to his seven volumes on The Chester Beatty Biblical Papyri, Sir Frederic Kenyon wrote: “The first and most important conclusion derived from the examination of them [the papyri] is the satisfactory one that they confirm the essential soundness of the existing texts. No striking or fundamental variation is shown either in the Old or the New Testament. There are no important omissions or additions of passages, and no variations which affect vital facts or doctrines. The variations of text affect minor matters, such as the order of words or the precise words used . . . But their essential importance is their confirmation, by evidence of an earlier date than was hitherto available, of the integrity of our existing texts.”—(London, 1933), p. 15.

One must conclude that, based on all of this evidence, there must have existed the man Jesus. The recorded writings of His life must be true. He did what the Bible says He did, walked where it says He walked, died as it says He died, rose from the dead as it says He did. All of these things happened. Even those who saw this and still didn’t accept Him as the Son of God agree that He was a magnificent speaker, teacher, a moral man without fault, and that He died and rose from death. They wouldn’t accept Him for reasons of selfish nature, be it fear (as the Pharisees), pride, or traditional religious belief. But 2000 some years later, we know what is lasting. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today, and forever. What will you choose?

a couple of weeks back i watched the first season of rome. the series. being somewhat of a roman-history-fanatic when i was younger, albeit totally superficial, as i was interested in any given lost civilization. and when i say i was a “fanatic”, i don’t mean like an expert in their history and culture or anything. as it was more like me having big romanticized dreams of these people of old. i wanted to be a samurai of a hidden village, a highland warrior running across majestic mountains, a lone rider of the west, a knight fighting for glory. a viking venturing off beyond the horizon yonder, exploring. i still do. anyway. so the concept intrigued me. most of all because of the involvement of caesar. having him as a main character poses a dilemma. how do you keep the tension going when everybody knows for certain that caesar will die by the hands of brutus and his conspirators. not to forget that his assassination is so well known, that everyone is bound to have, at least to some degree, conjured up images of their own. i was a skeptic. the greatest death scene in history. and left surprised. brutality, yes. but such grandeur also! the shame in caesar’s face. the devastation as he learns of brutus’ involvement. his dear friend. the ultimate betrayal. the final plunging of the knife. heartbreaking. such is the recordings of suetonius, the roman historian:

“The very night before his murder he dreamt now that he was flying above the clouds, and now that he was clasping the hand of Jupiter; and his wife Calpurnia thought that the pediment of their house fell, and that her husband was stabbed in her arms; and on a sudden the door of the room flew open of its own accord.”

“As he took his seat, the conspirators gathered about him as if to pay their respects, and straightaway Tillius Cimber, who had assumed the lead, came nearer as though to ask something.”

“And when Caesar with a gesture put him off to another time, Cimber caught his toga by both shoulders; as Caesar cried, “Why this is violence!”"

“[Then] one of the Cascas stabbed him from one side just below the throat. Caesar caught Casca’s arm and ran through it with his stylus, but as he tried to leap to his feet, he was stopped by another wound.”

“When he saw that he was beset on every side by drawn daggers, he muffled his head in his robe, and at the same time drew down its lap to his feet with his left hand in order to fall more decently, with the lower part of his body also covered.”

“And in this wise he was stabbed with three and twenty wounds, uttering not a word, but merely a groan at the first stroke, though some have written that when Marcus Brutus rushed at him, he said in Greek, “You too, my child?”

“All the conspirators made off, and he lay there lifeless for some time, and finally three common slaves put him on a litter and carried him home, with one arm hanging down. And of so many wounds none turned out to be mortal, in the opinion of the physician Antistius, except the second one in the breast.”

“Hardly any of his assassins survived him for more than three years, or died a natural death. They were all condemned, and they perished in various ways – some by shipwreck, some in battle; some took their own lives with the self-same dagger with which they had impiously slain Caesar.”

“About one thing almost all are fully agreed, that he all but desired such a death as he met; for once when he read in Xenophon how Cyrus in his last illness gave directions for his funeral, he expressed his horror of such a lingering kind of end and his wish for one which was swift and sudden. And the day before his murder, in a conversation which arose at a dinner at the house of Marcus Lepidus, as to what manner of death was most to be desired, he had given his preference to one which was sudden and unexpected.”

Portrait of a Roman official, first quarter of the second century (Koninklijke Musea voor Kunst en Geschiedenis, Brussel)

Suetonius is best known for the Lives of the Twelve Caesars, but that is just a part of his oeuvre, which also included such titles as Physical Defects of Men, Greek Children’s Games, Lives of Famous Prostitutes, and a dictionary that contained only terms of abuse. The twenty books of the Playground of Names and Languages culminated in a series of biographies of

• Latin poets like Horace, Lucan, Persius, Terence, Tibullus, Virgil (book 15),
• playwrights (book 16),
• orators (book 17),
• grammarians and rhetoricians (book 18),
• historians (Pliny the Elder) and philosophers (book 19).

Fragments survive, most of them rather short (like Passienus Crispus) but some of them still pretty long. They are now available at LacusCurtius: go here, or use one of the links above. You can find both the Latin texts and the Loeb translation.

�The Lives of the Twelve Caesars� was written around 100 AD just after one of the most turbulent times in ancient history when Rome had been undergoing a number of Civil wars. Recorded by Suetonius who was an eye witness to the later conflicts and infighting. This unique work has been used as the basis for a number of films and television series including �Gladiator�, �Rome�, “Spartacus” and �I Claudius�

Order The Lives of The Twelve Caesars from Amazon for $0.99

Other Kindle Books of Interest
How to Use the Amazon Kindle for Email & Other Cool Tricks: Read and Answer Email Anywhere, Anytime on the Amazing Amazon Kindle (The Complete User’s Guide to the Amazing Amazon Kindle)
The women of the Caesars
Livy’s Roman History Vol. I, II & III
Caesar’s Commentaries The Conquest of Gaul & The Civil War
The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius Antonius

Caius Suetonius Tranquillus (69 – 125), in “Vietile celor 12 Caesari”, analizand domnia imparatului Claudius, face remarca: “Expulza din Roma pe evrei, care se agitau mereu, instigati de Chrestus.” Am gasit dovada! – au strigat ametiti de victorie teologii. Daca Suetonius, istoricul cvasi-oficial al Imperiului, il aminteste pe Iisus, nimeni nu mai are motive sa se indoiasca. Cel care se va indoi va fi declarat eretic. Maruntaiele ii vor fi rascolite cu fierul incins, limba ii va fi smulsa. Va trece prin toate chinurile iadului si va regreta ziua cand a inceput sa gandeasca stramb si blasfemator! Nu va scapa nici de judecata oamenilor, nici de judecata lui Dumnezeu!

Chrestus. Nu Iisus. Doar Chrestus. Nume frecvent in randul sclavilor. Insemnand bun, activ, folositor. Nume potrivit pentru un sclav harnic si vanjos. Suntem in Roma. Anul 42. O revolta ingrijoratoare a sclavilor este inabusita de garzile pretoriene ale orasului. Cei mai multi sclavi sunt evrei. Daca au fost condusi de Chrestus, nu inseamna ca au fost crestini. Suntem la 9 ani de la moartea lui Christ. A reaparut pe pamant si crestinii nu au aflat? A condus incognito rascoala sclavilor… crestini? Sa fi fost, insa, atat de multi crestini la Roma incat sa descumpaneasca administratia cu o revolta destul de mare ca amploare? Inca nu se cristalizase o doctrina, nu existau texte scrise ale noii religii. Doar o traditie orala, pe care azi am numi-o legenda urbana. Crestinismul nu se definise ca religie, ci era o secta neinsemnata. Fara ramificatii notabile in Roma. In concluzie, informatia nu se refera la crestini, ci la evrei. Daca fraza este o interpolare, a fost neinspirata.

Descoperirea scrisorilor lui Plinius cel Tanar (61 – 114) catre imparatul Traian (53 – 117) a fost un nou prilej de entuziasm paroxistic. Cerneala a inceput sa curga in valuri. In volumul al X-lea apare o scrisoare in care Plinius cel Tanar, in calitate de propretor al Bithyniei (N-V Asiei Mici) si de consilier principal al imparatului (unul dintre cei mai competenti consilieri care au existat vreodata) ii cere lui Traian… sfatul. (Credeam ca imparatul cere sfatul consilierilor, nu invers…) Din scrisoarea lui Plinius, in care consilierul intreaba cum ar trebui sa procedeze cu crestinii, reiese ca autoritatile romane nu pedepseau pentru convingeri religioase. Pedepseau pentru nesupunere. Si tocmai instigatorii erau crestini. Nu e de mirare ca Traian le-a rezervat o moarte identica celei a idolului lor. Numai ca apar din nou dificultati. Ca de obicei, neglijenta crasa a teologilor plastografi a omis amanuntele care atesta originalitatea unei opere. Scrisorile nu sunt datate, desi fac parte din corespondenta oficiala, nu particulara. Asemenea omisiune este de neintalnit in administratia romana. Scrisoarea, singurul text in care Plinius scrie despre crestini, nu este citata de Xifilinus sau de Eusebiu din Cezareea. Cei doi s-ar fi folosit de text, intrucat aveau interese majore: erau crestini. Cautau cu infrigurare documente, probe, marturii. In scrisoarea lui Plinius este amintit fara rost numele lui Ignatius, episcop al Antiohiei. Biserica afirma ca este autorul unor scrisori cu continut teologal, ca a folosit pentru prima oara termenul “catolic” si ca a fost condamnat la moarte de catre Traian. Numai Polycarpos il numeste pe Ignatius* si spune ca a scris scrisori doctrinare. Toate celelalte surse sunt mute. Un teolog de asemenea importanta nu putea dezerta din istorie fara urma.

Sidonius Apollinaris (430 – 489), episcop de Clermont, a stabilit ca Plinius cel Tanar a scris 9 carti. Nu vorbeste despre celebra scrisoare catre Traian. Care apare in a… 10-a carte! S-a gasit, in schimb, o alta scrisoare. Care, usor deformata, i-a fost atribuita lui Plinius cel Tanar. Ea apartine unui functionar si este adresata lui Plinius, caruia i se cere sfatul privind atitudinea fata de o secta mesianista. Nu crestina. Scrisoarea nu-l pomeneste pe Iisus Christos. Toate circumstantele arata ca scrisoarea administrativa, pastrata in arhivele imperiale, a fost modelul falsului.

_____________________________________
*Legenda “martirului” Ignatius: aflandu-se in Rasaritul Imperiului, curios sa afle date despre crestini, Traian l-a chemat la el pe episcopul Ignatius. Arogant, Ignatius l-a caracterizat pe Traian ca fiind un ratacit care nu a auzit de singurul imparat: Dumnezeu. Infuriat, Traian l-a trimis la Roma ca sa fie executat. Bizar. Toti “martirii” au fost executati la Roma, chiar daca toata viata lor au trait in alt capat de lume. Sa asiguri transport gratuit de-a lungul si de-a latul Imperiului unui condamnat la moarte este o dovada de generozitate extrema din partea unui imparat. Normal ar fi fost sa-l execute in fata celor care au fost martori la insulta. Traian era un om aspru. Isi iesea repede din fire si se razbuna pe loc, distrugandu-si fizic adversarul. La fel a procedat si cu salbaticul Decebal. Existenta fizica a lui Ignatius este pusa la indoiala. Pe buna dreptate. Nu este singurul creat in industria manufacturiera a martirilor.