شبكة الإلحاد العربيُ  

العودة   شبكة الإلحاد العربيُ > ملتقيات في نقد الإيمان و الأديان > العقيدة اليهودية ۞ و المسيحية ✟ و العقائد الأخرى

إضافة رد
 
أدوات الموضوع اسلوب عرض الموضوع
قديم 01-05-2015, 02:47 AM fooad fooad غير متواجد حالياً   رقم الموضوع : [21]
fooad fooad
عضو جديد
 

fooad fooad is on a distinguished road
افتراضي

إن قصة الولادة من عذراء مقدسة سبقت قصة المسيح بالاف السنين مثال عشتار وطفلها الإلهي تموز الذي على فكرة عيد ميلاده هو 25/12وهو عيد الميلاد الذي تحتفل به الأن أما المسيح وارجع الى الأناجيل ووصفها فهو ولد أثناء فترة الصيف حسب وصف الأناجيل للطقس أما فكرة التدرج واقتراحك حول كيف يفكر الله فهو يخصك وحدك ولا يخص الله أما عن الخطيئة الموجهة إلى الله هل هناك خالق أخر غير الله خلق الخطيئة ونحن لا نعلم أم أن الخطيئة إلاه مستقل بنفسه ولا تقتبس من كلامي ما تريده فقط السؤال ما هي الخطيئة التي خلصنا منها يسوع ولن ادخل لك في مهاترات تاريخية لإن هناك الكثير من الكتب التي تناقض كلامك أريد أن أكلمك بمطق الأشياء واحد زائد واحد يساوي إثنين أيها المتدين بالولادة



  رد مع اقتباس
قديم 01-05-2015, 04:56 AM   رقم الموضوع : [22]
البرنس
زائر
 
افتراضي

اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة fooad fooad مشاهدة المشاركة
إن قصة الولادة من عذراء مقدسة سبقت قصة المسيح بالاف السنين مثال عشتار وطفلها الإلهي تموز الذي على فكرة عيد ميلاده هو 25/12وهو عيد الميلاد الذي تحتفل به الأن أما المسيح وارجع الى الأناجيل ووصفها فهو ولد أثناء فترة الصيف حسب وصف الأناجيل للطقس أما فكرة التدرج واقتراحك حول كيف يفكر الله فهو يخصك وحدك ولا يخص الله أما عن الخطيئة الموجهة إلى الله هل هناك خالق أخر غير الله خلق الخطيئة ونحن لا نعلم أم أن الخطيئة إلاه مستقل بنفسه ولا تقتبس من كلامي ما تريده فقط السؤال ما هي الخطيئة التي خلصنا منها يسوع ولن ادخل لك في مهاترات تاريخية لإن هناك الكثير من الكتب التي تناقض كلامك أريد أن أكلمك بمطق الأشياء واحد زائد واحد يساوي إثنين أيها المتدين بالولادة
bla bla bla bla

طريقك خضراء مش ناقصنا جهل وافلاس



  رد مع اقتباس
قديم 01-05-2015, 05:29 AM Skeptic غير متواجد حالياً   رقم الموضوع : [23]
Skeptic
V.I.P
الصورة الرمزية Skeptic
 

Skeptic has a spectacular aura aboutSkeptic has a spectacular aura about
افتراضي

اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة البرنس مشاهدة المشاركة
bla bla bla bla

طريقك خضراء مش ناقصنا جهل وافلاس

المهم...
ليس لديك أدلة من مؤرخ واحد شاهد الهك او قابلة،او سمع به في حياتة... انت تعبد اوهام....



الصور المرفقة
نوع الملف: jpg 960249_564732526928256_1544385526_n[1].jpg (22.6 كيلوبايت, المشاهدات 27)
التعديل الأخير تم بواسطة Skeptic ; 02-01-2020 الساعة 08:55 AM.
:: توقيعي :::

الإلحاد العربيُّ يتحدّى

الأديان أكبر عملية نصب واحتيال في تاريخ البشرية
  رد مع اقتباس
قديم 01-05-2015, 03:37 PM   رقم الموضوع : [24]
البرنس
زائر
 
افتراضي

اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة skeptic مشاهدة المشاركة


المهم...
ليس لديك أدلة من مؤرخ واحد شاهد الهك او قابلة،او سمع به في حياتة... انت تعبد اوهام....
المهم انك عاجز مفلس امام الادله من اقلام المؤرخين الذين عاشوا مع المسيح وجلسوا معه واكلوا معه ولمسوه بايدهم وتكلموا معه وجها لوجه ..!

انت تقول لا يوجد وانا اثبت بالادله التي تهرب منها مفلسا انه يوجد ولنترك الحكم للقارء اذن .



  رد مع اقتباس
قديم 01-05-2015, 04:13 PM Skeptic غير متواجد حالياً   رقم الموضوع : [25]
Skeptic
V.I.P
الصورة الرمزية Skeptic
 

Skeptic has a spectacular aura aboutSkeptic has a spectacular aura about
افتراضي

اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة البرنس مشاهدة المشاركة
المهم انك عاجز مفلس امام الادله من اقلام المؤرخين الذين عاشوا مع المسيح وجلسوا معه واكلوا معه ولمسوه بايدهم وتكلموا معه وجها لوجه ..!

انت تقول لا يوجد وانا اثبت بالادله التي تهرب منها مفلسا انه يوجد ولنترك الحكم للقارء اذن .
اعطني مثال لمؤرخ واحد ؟
انت مفلس ولذلك تهين المحاور معك...
انا لم أهنك.. ارجوا الأحترام...
هذة قائمة لمؤرخين عاصروا العصر المزعوم لالهكم، لم يذكر احد منهم مشاهدتة...

لماذا لم يتحدث ايا منهم عن الهك بتاع الطين المنتن؟
من منا المفلس؟
تحياتي



:: توقيعي :::

الإلحاد العربيُّ يتحدّى

الأديان أكبر عملية نصب واحتيال في تاريخ البشرية
  رد مع اقتباس
قديم 01-05-2015, 08:43 PM   رقم الموضوع : [26]
البرنس
زائر
 
افتراضي

اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة Skeptic مشاهدة المشاركة

اعطني مثال لمؤرخ واحد ؟
انت مفلس ولذلك تهين المحاور معك...
انا لم أهنك.. ارجوا الأحترام...
هذة قائمة لمؤرخين عاصروا العصر المزعوم لالهكم، لم يذكر احد منهم مشاهدتة...

لماذا لم يتحدث ايا منهم عن الهك بتاع الطين المنتن؟
من منا المفلس؟
تحياتي
انا لست مفلس ولا اهين احد بل انت من يهين نفسك بأنكارك الوثائق التاريخيه والادله التاريخيه التي تثبت وجود المسيح وهذا يسمى قمه العبث !



لست انت من يقرر وجود المسيح من عدمه .. طالما في ادله تاريخيه واثريه ومؤرخين اثبتوا واعترفوا بوجود المسيح فلا يحق لك انكارها لمجرد انت كملحد ترفض وجود اي احد لا تريد الاعتراف به لمجرد العناد فقط لا غير !

المسيح موجود طبقا لاعترافات المؤرخين والوثائق التاريخيه :

1 - جميع المؤرخين الذي تكلموا عن وجود المسيح سواء وثنين او يهود او مسيحين مذكورين في الموضوع في مداخلتي رقم 7
2 - المؤرخين المذكورين في اوثق وثيقة وحجية تاريخيه قديمه بدون استثناء وبدون منافس على وجه الارض لوجود جميع نسخها سواء القانونية او الغير قانونية او المحرفه مما يستحيل تحريفها او تزويرها او تنقيحها والمنتشره بمليارات النسخه بالالف الترجمات بعشرات الالف من المخطوطات والمسماه "بالكتاب المقدس" تثبت وجود المسيح باقلام من عاشوا معه شخصيا وتكلموا معه وجها لوجه ولمسوه بايديهم وتتلمذوا على يده ..
3 - كتب التلمود بالرغم من الاختلاف في وجهة النظر نحوه تثبت وجود المسيح
4 - الموسوعة اليهودية تثبت وجود المسيح
5 - الاثار في دولة اسرائيل تثبت وجود المسيح

الادله التاريخيه واعترافات المؤرخين على وجود المسيح :

Historicity of Jesus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

Evidence of the historical Jesus

https://www.mediafire.com/?w8bpnxkoyf29kym

جوزيفس (37 - 97 ب.م. ) مؤرخ يهودي كتب عن تاريخ شعبه في عشرين مجلداً . حيث سجل قصة حياة المسيح وتعاليمه ، ومعجزاته ، وقصة صلبه بالتفصيل ، بأمر من بيلاطس البنطي . ثم أشار ايضاً الى ظهور المسيح لتلاميذه حياً في اليوم الثالث

لوسيان الإغريقي مؤرخ بارز كتب عن صلب المسيح وعن المسيحيين الذين كانوا قد قبلوا الموت لأجل ايمانهم بالمسيح .

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08522a.htm

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08522a.htm

وننستطيع ان نستعرض للقراء :

Tacitus

We possess at least the testimony of Tacitus (A.D. 54-119) for the statements that the Founder of the Christian religion, a deadly superstition in the eyes of the Romans, had been put to death by the procuratorPontius Pilate under the reign of Tiberius; that His religion, though suppressed for a time, broke forth again not only throughout Judea where it had originated, but even in Rome, the conflux of all the streams of wickedness and shamelessness; furthermore, that Nero had diverted from himself the suspicion of the burning of Rome by charging the Christians with the crime; that these latter were not guilty of arson, though they deserved their fate on account of their universal misanthropy. Tacitus, moreover, describes some of the horrible torments to which Nero subjected the Christians (Ann., XV, xliv). The Roman writer confounds the Christians with the Jews, considering them as a especially abject Jewish sect; how little he investigated the historical truth of even the Jewish records may be inferred from the credulity with which he accepted the absurd legends and calumnies about the origin of he Hebrew people (Hist., V, iii, iv).

Suetonius

Another Roman writer who shows his acquaintance with Christ and the Christians is Suetonius (A.D. 75-160). It has been noted that Suetonius considered Christ (Chrestus) as a Roman insurgent who stirred up seditions under the reign of Claudius (A.D. 41-54): "Judaeos, impulsore Chresto, assidue tumultuantes (Claudius) Roma expulit" (Clau., xxv). In his life of Nero he regards that emperor as a public benefactor on account of his severe treatment of the Christians: "Multa sub eo et animadversa severe, et coercita, nec minus instituta . . . . afflicti Christiani, genus hominum superstitious novae et maleficae" (Nero, xvi). The Roman writer does not understand that the Jewish troubles arose from the Jewish antagonism to the Messianic character of Jesus Christ and to the rights of the Christian Church.Pliny the Younger


Of greater importance is the letter of Pliny the Younger to the Emperor Trajan (about A.D. 61-115), in which the Governor of Bithynia consults his imperial majesty as to how to deal with the Christians living within his jurisdiction. On the one hand, their lives were confessedly innocent; no crime could be proved against them excepting their Christianbelief, which appeared to the Roman as an extravagant and perverse superstition. On the other hand, the Christians could not be shaken in their allegiance to Christ, Whom they celebrated as their God in their early morning meetings (Ep., X, 97, 98). Christianity here appears no longer as a religion of criminals, as it does in the texts of Tacitus and Suetonius; Pliny acknowledges the high moral principles of the Christians, admires their constancy in the Faith (pervicacia et inflexibilis obstinatio), which he appears to trace back to their worship of Christ (carmenque Christo, quasi Deo, dicere).


Other pagan writers

The remaining pagan witnesses are of less importance: In the second century Lucian sneered at Christ and the Christians, as he scoffed at the pagan gods. He alludes to Christ's death on the Cross, to His miracles, to the mutual love prevailing among the Christians ("Philopseudes", nn. 13, 16; "De Morte Pereg"). There are also alleged allusions to Christ in Numenius (Origen, Against Celsus IV.51), to His parables in Galerius, to the earthquake at the Crucifixion in Phlegon (Origen, Against Celsus II.14). Before the end of the second century, the logos alethes of Celsus, as quoted by Origen (Contra Celsus, passim), testifies that at that time the facts related in the Gospels were generally accepted as historically true. However scanty the pagan sources of the life of Christ may be, they bear at least testimony to His existence, to His miracles, His parables, His claim to Divine worship, His death on the Cross, and to the more striking characteristics of His religion.


Jewish sources

Philo


Philo, who dies after A.D. 40, is mainly important for the light he throws on certain modes of thought and phraseology found again in some of the Apostles. Eusebius (Church History II.4) indeed preserves a legend that Philo had met St. Peter in Rome during his mission to the Emperor Caius; moreover, that in his work on the contemplative life he describes the life of the Christian Church in Alexandria founded by St. Mark, rather than that of the Essenes and Therapeutae. But it is hardly probable that Philo had heard enough of Christ and His followers to give an historical foundation to the foregoing legends.


Josephus


The earlist non-Christian writer who refers Christ is the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus; born A.D. 37, he was a contemporary of the Apostles, and died in Rome A.D. 94. Two passages in his "Antiquities" which confirm two facts of the inspired Christian records are not disputed. In the one he reports the murder of "John called Baptist" by Herod (Ant., XVIII, v, 2), describing also John's character and work; in the other (Ant., XX, ix, 1) he disapproves of the sentence pronounced by the high priest Ananus against "James, brother of Jesus Who was called Christ." It is antecedently probable that a writer so well informed as Josephus, must have been well acquainted too with the doctrine and the history of Jesus Christ. Seeing, also, that he records events of minor importance in the history of the Jews, it would be surprising if he were to keep silence about Jesus Christ. Consideration for the priests and Pharisees did not prevent him from mentioning the judicial murders of John the Baptist and the Apostle James; his endeavour to find the fulfilment of the Messianic prophecies in Vespasian did not induce him to pass in silence over several Jewish sects, though their tenets appear to be inconsistent with the Vespasian claims. One naturally expects, therefore, a notice about Jesus Christ in Josephus. Antiquities XVIII, iii, 3, seems to satisfy this expectation:
About this time appeared Jesus, a wise man (if indeed it is right to call Him man; for He was a worker of astonishing deeds, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with joy), and He drew to Himself many Jews (many also of Greeks. This was the Christ.) And when Pilate, at the denunciation of those that are foremost among us, had condemned Him to the cross, those who had first loved Him did not abandon Him (for He appeared to them alive again on the third day, the holy prophets having foretold this and countless other marvels about Him.) The tribe of Christians named after Him did not cease to this day.
A testimony so important as the foregoing could not escape the work of the critics. Their conclusions may be reduced to three headings: those who consider the passage wholly spurious; those who consider it to be wholly authentic; and those who consider it to be a little of each.
Those who regard the passage as spurious

First, there are those who consider the whole passage as spurious. The principal reasons for this view appear to be the following:
Josephus could not represent Jesus Christ as a simple moralist, and on the other hand he could not emphasize the Messianic prophecies and expectations without offending the Roman susceptibilities;
the above cited passage from Josephus is said to be unknown to Origen and the earlier patristic writers;
its very place in the Josephan text is uncertain, since Eusebius (Church History II.6) must have found it before the notices concerning Pilate, while it now stands after them.
But the spuriousness of the disputed Josephan passage does not imply the historian's ignorance of the facts connected with Jesus Christ. Josephus's report of his own juvenile precocity before the Jewish teachers (Vit., 2) reminds one of the story of Christ's stay in the Temple at the age of twelve; the de******ion of his shipwreck on his journey to Rome (Vit., 3) recalls St. Paul's shipwreck as told in the Acts; finally his arbitrary introduction of a deceit practised by the priests of Isis on a Roman lady, after the chapter containing his supposed allusion to Jesus, shows a disposition to explain away the virgin birth of Jesus and to prepare the falsehoods embodied in the later Jewish writings.

Those who regard the passage as authentic, with some spurious
additions

A second class of critics do not regard the whole of Josephus's testimony concerning Christ as spurious but they maintain the interpolation of parts included above in parenthesis. The reasons assigned for this opinion may be reduced to the following two:
Josephus must have mentioned Jesus, but he cannot have recognized Him as the Christ; hence part of our present Josephan text must be genuine, part must be interpolated.
Again, the same conclusion follows from the fact that Origenknew a Josephan text about Jesus, but was not acquainted with our present reading; for, according to the great Alexandrian doctor, Josephus did not believe that Jesus was the Messias ("In Matth.", xiii, 55; Against Celsus I.47).
Whatever force these two arguments have is lost by the fact that Josephus did not write for the Jews but for the Romans; consequently, when he says, "This was the Christ", he does not necessarily imply that Jesus was the Christ considered by the Romans as the founder of the Christian religion.

Those who consider it to be completely genuine

The third class of scholars believe that the whole passage concerning Jesus, as it is found today in Josephus, is genuine. The main arguments for the genuineness of the Josephan passage are the following:
First, all codices or manu******s of Josephus's work contain the text in question; to maintain the spuriousness of the text, we must suppose that all the copies of Josephus were in the hands of Christians, and were changed in the same way.
Second, it is true that neither Tertullian nor St. Justin makes use of Josephus's passage concerning Jesus; but this silence is probably due to the contempt with which the contemporary Jews regarded Josephus, and to the relatively little authority he had among the Roman readers. Writers of the age of Tertullian and Justin could appeal to living witnesses of the Apostolic tradition.
Third, Eusebius ("Hist. Eccl"., I, xi; cf. "Dem. Ev.", III, v) Sozomen (Church History I.1), Niceph. (Hist. Eccl., I, 39), Isidore of Pelusium (Ep. IV, 225), St. Jerome (catal.******. eccles. xiii), Ambrose, Cassiodorus, etc., appeal to the testimony of Josephus; there must have been no doubt as to its authenticity at the time of these illustrious writers.
Fourth, the complete silence of Josephus as to Jesus would have been a more eloquent testimony than we possess in his present text; this latter contains no statement incompatible with its Josephan authorship: the Roman reader needed the information that Jesus was the Christ, or the founder of the Christian religion; the wonderful works of Jesus and His Resurrection from the dead were so incessantly urged by the Christians that without these attributes the Josephan Jesus would hardly have been acknowledged as the founder of Christianity.
All this does not necessarily imply that Josephus regarded Jesus as the Jewish Messias; but, even if he had been convinced of His Messiahship, it does not follow that he would have become a Christian. A number of possible subterfuges might have supplied the Jewish historian with apparently sufficient reasons for not embracing Christianity.




Other Jewish sources


The historical character of Jesus Christ is also attested by the hostile Jewish literature of the subsequent centuries. His birth is ascribed to an illicit ("Acta Pilati" in Thilo, "Codex apocryph. N.T., I, 526; cf. Justin, "Apol.", I, 35), or even an adulterous, union of His parents (Origen, Against Celsus I.28 and I.32). The father's name is Panthera, a common soldier (Gemara "Sanhedrin", viii; "Schabbath", xii, cf. Eisenmenger, "Entdecktes Judenthum", I, 109; Schottgen, "Horae Hebraicae", II, 696; Buxtorf, "Lex. Chald.", Basle, 1639, 1459, Huldreich, "Sepher toledhoth yeshua hannaceri", Leyden, 1705). The last work in its final edition did not appear before the thirteenth century, so that it could give the Panthera myth in its most advanced form. Rosch is of opinion that the myth did not begin before the end of the first century.The later Jewish writings show traces of acquaintance with the murder of the Holy Innocents (Wagenseil, "Confut. Libr. Toldoth", 15; Eisenmenger op. cit., I, 116; Schottgen, op. cit., II, 667), with the flight into Egypt (cf. Josephus, "Ant." XIII, xiii), with the stay of Jesus in the Temple at the age of twelve (Schottgen, op. cit., II, 696), with the call of the disciples ("Sanhedrin", 43a; Wagenseil, op. cit., 17; Schottgen, loc. cit., 713), with His miracles (Origen, Against Celsus II.48; Wagenseil, op. cit., 150; Gemara "Sanhedrin" fol. 17); "Schabbath", fol. 104b; Wagenseil, op. cit., 6, 7, 17), with His claim to be God (Origen, Against Celsus I.28; cf. Eisenmenger, op. cit., I, 152; Schottgen, loc. cit., 699) with His betrayal by Judas and His death (Origen, "Contra cels.", II, 9, 45, 68, 70; Buxtorf, op. cit., 1458; Lightfoot, "Hor. Heb.", 458, 490, 498; Eisenmenger, loc. cit., 185; Schottgen, loc. cit., 699 700; cf. "Sanhedrin", vi, vii). Celsus (Origen, Against Celsus II.55) tries to throw doubt on the Resurrection, while Toldoth (cf. Wagenseil, 19) repeats the Jewish fiction that the body of Jesus had been stolen from the sepulchre.



  رد مع اقتباس
قديم 01-06-2015, 03:17 AM Skeptic غير متواجد حالياً   رقم الموضوع : [27]
Skeptic
V.I.P
الصورة الرمزية Skeptic
 

Skeptic has a spectacular aura aboutSkeptic has a spectacular aura about
افتراضي

اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة البرنس مشاهدة المشاركة
انا لست مفلس ولا اهين احد بل انت من يهين نفسك بأنكارك الوثائق التاريخيه والادله التاريخيه التي تثبت وجود المسيح وهذا يسمى قمه العبث !



لست انت من يقرر وجود المسيح من عدمه .. طالما في ادله تاريخيه واثريه ومؤرخين اثبتوا واعترفوا بوجود المسيح فلا يحق لك انكارها لمجرد انت كملحد ترفض وجود اي احد لا تريد الاعتراف به لمجرد العناد فقط لا غير !

المسيح موجود طبقا لاعترافات المؤرخين والوثائق التاريخيه :

1 - جميع المؤرخين الذي تكلموا عن وجود المسيح سواء وثنين او يهود او مسيحين مذكورين في الموضوع في مداخلتي رقم 7
2 - المؤرخين المذكورين في اوثق وثيقة وحجية تاريخيه قديمه بدون استثناء وبدون منافس على وجه الارض لوجود جميع نسخها سواء القانونية او الغير قانونية او المحرفه مما يستحيل تحريفها او تزويرها او تنقيحها والمنتشره بمليارات النسخه بالالف الترجمات بعشرات الالف من المخطوطات والمسماه "بالكتاب المقدس" تثبت وجود المسيح باقلام من عاشوا معه شخصيا وتكلموا معه وجها لوجه ولمسوه بايديهم وتتلمذوا على يده ..
3 - كتب التلمود بالرغم من الاختلاف في وجهة النظر نحوه تثبت وجود المسيح
4 - الموسوعة اليهودية تثبت وجود المسيح
5 - الاثار في دولة اسرائيل تثبت وجود المسيح

الادله التاريخيه واعترافات المؤرخين على وجود المسيح :

Historicity of jesus

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/historicity_of_jesus

evidence of the historical jesus

https://www.mediafire.com/?w8bpnxkoyf29kym

جوزيفس (37 - 97 ب.م. ) مؤرخ يهودي كتب عن تاريخ شعبه في عشرين مجلداً . حيث سجل قصة حياة المسيح وتعاليمه ، ومعجزاته ، وقصة صلبه بالتفصيل ، بأمر من بيلاطس البنطي . ثم أشار ايضاً الى ظهور المسيح لتلاميذه حياً في اليوم الثالث

لوسيان الإغريقي مؤرخ بارز كتب عن صلب المسيح وعن المسيحيين الذين كانوا قد قبلوا الموت لأجل ايمانهم بالمسيح .

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08522a.htm

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/08522a.htm

وننستطيع ان نستعرض للقراء :

Tacitus

we possess at least the testimony of tacitus (a.d. 54-119) for the statements that the founder of the christian religion, a deadly superstition in the eyes of the romans, had been put to death by the procuratorpontius pilate under the reign of tiberius; that his religion, though suppressed for a time, broke forth again not only throughout judea where it had originated, but even in rome, the conflux of all the streams of wickedness and shamelessness; furthermore, that nero had diverted from himself the suspicion of the burning of rome by charging the christians with the crime; that these latter were not guilty of arson, though they deserved their fate on account of their universal misanthropy. Tacitus, moreover, describes some of the horrible torments to which nero subjected the christians (ann., xv, xliv). The roman writer confounds the christians with the jews, considering them as a especially abject jewish sect; how little he investigated the historical truth of even the jewish records may be inferred from the credulity with which he accepted the absurd legends and calumnies about the origin of he hebrew people (hist., v, iii, iv).

Suetonius

another roman writer who shows his acquaintance with christ and the christians is suetonius (a.d. 75-160). It has been noted that suetonius considered christ (chrestus) as a roman insurgent who stirred up seditions under the reign of claudius (a.d. 41-54): "judaeos, impulsore chresto, assidue tumultuantes (claudius) roma expulit" (clau., xxv). In his life of nero he regards that emperor as a public benefactor on account of his severe treatment of the christians: "multa sub eo et animadversa severe, et coercita, nec minus instituta . . . . Afflicti christiani, genus hominum superstitious novae et maleficae" (nero, xvi). The roman writer does not understand that the jewish troubles arose from the jewish antagonism to the messianic character of jesus christ and to the rights of the christian church.pliny the younger


of greater importance is the letter of pliny the younger to the emperor trajan (about a.d. 61-115), in which the governor of bithynia consults his imperial majesty as to how to deal with the christians living within his jurisdiction. On the one hand, their lives were confessedly innocent; no crime could be proved against them excepting their christianbelief, which appeared to the roman as an extravagant and perverse superstition. On the other hand, the christians could not be shaken in their allegiance to christ, whom they celebrated as their god in their early morning meetings (ep., x, 97, 98). Christianity here appears no longer as a religion of criminals, as it does in the texts of tacitus and suetonius; pliny acknowledges the high moral principles of the christians, admires their constancy in the faith (pervicacia et inflexibilis obstinatio), which he appears to trace back to their worship of christ (carmenque christo, quasi deo, dicere).


Other pagan writers

the remaining pagan witnesses are of less importance: In the second century lucian sneered at christ and the christians, as he scoffed at the pagan gods. He alludes to christ's death on the cross, to his miracles, to the mutual love prevailing among the christians ("philopseudes", nn. 13, 16; "de morte pereg"). There are also alleged allusions to christ in numenius (origen, against celsus iv.51), to his parables in galerius, to the earthquake at the crucifixion in phlegon (origen, against celsus ii.14). Before the end of the second century, the logos alethes of celsus, as quoted by origen (contra celsus, passim), testifies that at that time the facts related in the gospels were generally accepted as historically true. However scanty the pagan sources of the life of christ may be, they bear at least testimony to his existence, to his miracles, his parables, his claim to divine worship, his death on the cross, and to the more striking characteristics of his religion.


Jewish sources

philo


philo, who dies after a.d. 40, is mainly important for the light he throws on certain modes of thought and phraseology found again in some of the apostles. Eusebius (church history ii.4) indeed preserves a legend that philo had met st. Peter in rome during his mission to the emperor caius; moreover, that in his work on the contemplative life he describes the life of the christian church in alexandria founded by st. Mark, rather than that of the essenes and therapeutae. But it is hardly probable that philo had heard enough of christ and his followers to give an historical foundation to the foregoing legends.


Josephus


the earlist non-christian writer who refers christ is the jewish historian flavius josephus; born a.d. 37, he was a contemporary of the apostles, and died in rome a.d. 94. Two passages in his "antiquities" which confirm two facts of the inspired christian records are not disputed. In the one he reports the murder of "john called baptist" by herod (ant., xviii, v, 2), describing also john's character and work; in the other (ant., xx, ix, 1) he disapproves of the sentence pronounced by the high priest ananus against "james, brother of jesus who was called christ." it is antecedently probable that a writer so well informed as josephus, must have been well acquainted too with the doctrine and the history of jesus christ. Seeing, also, that he records events of minor importance in the history of the jews, it would be surprising if he were to keep silence about jesus christ. Consideration for the priests and pharisees did not prevent him from mentioning the judicial murders of john the baptist and the apostle james; his endeavour to find the fulfilment of the messianic prophecies in vespasian did not induce him to pass in silence over several jewish sects, though their tenets appear to be inconsistent with the vespasian claims. One naturally expects, therefore, a notice about jesus christ in josephus. Antiquities xviii, iii, 3, seems to satisfy this expectation:
About this time appeared jesus, a wise man (if indeed it is right to call him man; for he was a worker of astonishing deeds, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with joy), and he drew to himself many jews (many also of greeks. This was the christ.) and when pilate, at the denunciation of those that are foremost among us, had condemned him to the cross, those who had first loved him did not abandon him (for he appeared to them alive again on the third day, the holy prophets having foretold this and countless other marvels about him.) the tribe of christians named after him did not cease to this day.
A testimony so important as the foregoing could not escape the work of the critics. Their conclusions may be reduced to three headings: Those who consider the passage wholly spurious; those who consider it to be wholly authentic; and those who consider it to be a little of each.
Those who regard the passage as spurious

first, there are those who consider the whole passage as spurious. The principal reasons for this view appear to be the following:
Josephus could not represent jesus christ as a simple moralist, and on the other hand he could not emphasize the messianic prophecies and expectations without offending the roman susceptibilities;
the above cited passage from josephus is said to be unknown to origen and the earlier patristic writers;
its very place in the josephan text is uncertain, since eusebius (church history ii.6) must have found it before the notices concerning pilate, while it now stands after them.
But the spuriousness of the disputed josephan passage does not imply the historian's ignorance of the facts connected with jesus christ. Josephus's report of his own juvenile precocity before the jewish teachers (vit., 2) reminds one of the story of christ's stay in the temple at the age of twelve; the de******ion of his shipwreck on his journey to rome (vit., 3) recalls st. Paul's shipwreck as told in the acts; finally his arbitrary introduction of a deceit practised by the priests of isis on a roman lady, after the chapter containing his supposed allusion to jesus, shows a disposition to explain away the virgin birth of jesus and to prepare the falsehoods embodied in the later jewish writings.

Those who regard the passage as authentic, with some spurious
additions

a second class of critics do not regard the whole of josephus's testimony concerning christ as spurious but they maintain the interpolation of parts included above in parenthesis. The reasons assigned for this opinion may be reduced to the following two:
Josephus must have mentioned jesus, but he cannot have recognized him as the christ; hence part of our present josephan text must be genuine, part must be interpolated.
Again, the same conclusion follows from the fact that origenknew a josephan text about jesus, but was not acquainted with our present reading; for, according to the great alexandrian doctor, josephus did not believe that jesus was the messias ("in matth.", xiii, 55; against celsus i.47).
Whatever force these two arguments have is lost by the fact that josephus did not write for the jews but for the romans; consequently, when he says, "this was the christ", he does not necessarily imply that jesus was the christ considered by the romans as the founder of the christian religion.

Those who consider it to be completely genuine

the third class of scholars believe that the whole passage concerning jesus, as it is found today in josephus, is genuine. The main arguments for the genuineness of the josephan passage are the following:
First, all codices or manu******s of josephus's work contain the text in question; to maintain the spuriousness of the text, we must suppose that all the copies of josephus were in the hands of christians, and were changed in the same way.
Second, it is true that neither tertullian nor st. Justin makes use of josephus's passage concerning jesus; but this silence is probably due to the contempt with which the contemporary jews regarded josephus, and to the relatively little authority he had among the roman readers. Writers of the age of tertullian and justin could appeal to living witnesses of the apostolic tradition.
Third, eusebius ("hist. Eccl"., i, xi; cf. "dem. Ev.", iii, v) sozomen (church history i.1), niceph. (hist. Eccl., i, 39), isidore of pelusium (ep. Iv, 225), st. Jerome (catal.******. Eccles. Xiii), ambrose, cassiodorus, etc., appeal to the testimony of josephus; there must have been no doubt as to its authenticity at the time of these illustrious writers.
Fourth, the complete silence of josephus as to jesus would have been a more eloquent testimony than we possess in his present text; this latter contains no statement incompatible with its josephan authorship: The roman reader needed the information that jesus was the christ, or the founder of the christian religion; the wonderful works of jesus and his resurrection from the dead were so incessantly urged by the christians that without these attributes the josephan jesus would hardly have been acknowledged as the founder of christianity.
All this does not necessarily imply that josephus regarded jesus as the jewish messias; but, even if he had been convinced of his messiahship, it does not follow that he would have become a christian. A number of possible subterfuges might have supplied the jewish historian with apparently sufficient reasons for not embracing christianity.




Other jewish sources


the historical character of jesus christ is also attested by the hostile jewish literature of the subsequent centuries. His birth is ascribed to an illicit ("acta pilati" in thilo, "codex apocryph. N.t., i, 526; cf. Justin, "apol.", i, 35), or even an adulterous, union of his parents (origen, against celsus i.28 and i.32). The father's name is panthera, a common soldier (gemara "sanhedrin", viii; "schabbath", xii, cf. Eisenmenger, "entdecktes judenthum", i, 109; schottgen, "horae hebraicae", ii, 696; buxtorf, "lex. Chald.", basle, 1639, 1459, huldreich, "sepher toledhoth yeshua hannaceri", leyden, 1705). The last work in its final edition did not appear before the thirteenth century, so that it could give the panthera myth in its most advanced form. Rosch is of opinion that the myth did not begin before the end of the first century.the later jewish writings show traces of acquaintance with the murder of the holy innocents (wagenseil, "confut. Libr. Toldoth", 15; eisenmenger op. Cit., i, 116; schottgen, op. Cit., ii, 667), with the flight into egypt (cf. Josephus, "ant." xiii, xiii), with the stay of jesus in the temple at the age of twelve (schottgen, op. Cit., ii, 696), with the call of the disciples ("sanhedrin", 43a; wagenseil, op. Cit., 17; schottgen, loc. Cit., 713), with his miracles (origen, against celsus ii.48; wagenseil, op. Cit., 150; gemara "sanhedrin" fol. 17); "schabbath", fol. 104b; wagenseil, op. Cit., 6, 7, 17), with his claim to be god (origen, against celsus i.28; cf. Eisenmenger, op. Cit., i, 152; schottgen, loc. Cit., 699) with his betrayal by judas and his death (origen, "contra cels.", ii, 9, 45, 68, 70; buxtorf, op. Cit., 1458; lightfoot, "hor. Heb.", 458, 490, 498; eisenmenger, loc. Cit., 185; schottgen, loc. Cit., 699 700; cf. "sanhedrin", vi, vii). Celsus (origen, against celsus ii.55) tries to throw doubt on the resurrection, while toldoth (cf. Wagenseil, 19) repeats the jewish fiction that the body of jesus had been stolen from the sepulchre.
1. المصادر اليهودية تشابة انجيل برنابة...
2. المصادر التاريخة مشكوك بها، وايضا لأشخاص لم يعاصروا المسيح.. مثل تاسيتوس، لم يعاصر المسيح، هو كتب عن وجود طائفة تتبع المسيح، لم يشاهدة، لم يراة في القدس..
3. جميع المؤرخين الذين ذهبوا للقدس في ذلك الوقت لم يذكروا ابدا المسيح...
تحياتي



:: توقيعي :::

الإلحاد العربيُّ يتحدّى

الأديان أكبر عملية نصب واحتيال في تاريخ البشرية
  رد مع اقتباس
قديم 01-06-2015, 08:04 PM   رقم الموضوع : [28]
البرنس
زائر
 
افتراضي

اقتباس:
المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة skeptic مشاهدة المشاركة
1. المصادر اليهودية تشابة انجيل برنابة...
2. المصادر التاريخة مشكوك بها، وايضا لأشخاص لم يعاصروا المسيح.. مثل تاسيتوس، لم يعاصر المسيح، هو كتب عن وجود طائفة تتبع المسيح، لم يشاهدة، لم يراة في القدس..
3. جميع المؤرخين الذين ذهبوا للقدس في ذلك الوقت لم يذكروا ابدا المسيح...
تحياتي
لم يسالك احد عن وجهه نظرك الشخصيه كملحد في الطعن والرفض لكل ما لا يسير على هواك ومزاجك ومحي تاريخ الانسانية والقاء العلوم في المزابل لارضاء افكارك الالحادية !

المؤرخين الذي يعتبرون مرجعا للعلم ويدونون التاريخ الانساني ويسجلون تاريخ الشعوب والامم والحوادث ويهتمون بالسرد المنهجي المتتالي والبحث .. سواء كانوا مؤرخين محايدين كالوثنين او اليهود من اعداء الديانه المسيحيه او مسيحين فقد شهدوا لوجود المسيح التاريخي .

الموضوع مش بمزاجك .. هناك شي اسمه علم تاريخي ونقد علمي وادله وشواهد تاريخيه واثرية وكتابيه .



  رد مع اقتباس
قديم 01-06-2015, 11:31 PM fooad fooad غير متواجد حالياً   رقم الموضوع : [29]
fooad fooad
عضو جديد
 

fooad fooad is on a distinguished road
افتراضي

الضحك في الموضوع أن صديقنا البرنس يلجأ لشرح زمان المسيح إلى اليلكتيك المادي التاريخي ونظريات التطور رغم أني أقول له كل الأناجيل لم تكتب سوى عن سنة واحدة فقط من حياة المسيح أما أين كان في 32سنة لا أحد يدري سوى نبذة عن ولادته ومقطع صغير وهو في عمر السادسة ولم يذكر أي شيء عن الكنيسة النسطورية والغنوصية التي سبقت القول بالتثليث وكانت تقول أنه مجرد نبي لله والمضحك أني أذكر أني عندما راجعت نسب المسيح في الأناجيل وفي أول صفحة إستغربت أنهم يكتبون يسوع ابن يوسف النجار فلماذا النقاش إذاً



  رد مع اقتباس
قديم 01-06-2015, 11:41 PM fooad fooad غير متواجد حالياً   رقم الموضوع : [30]
fooad fooad
عضو جديد
 

fooad fooad is on a distinguished road
افتراضي

أما عن تبجحك بالمصادر التاريخية فاليهود يقولون أن المسيح أبن جندي روماني كان عشيق لوالدته أضف إلى ذلك أن الكتاب المقدس العهد القديم يقول أن إثنتين من جدات المسيح راحاب واموس ولست دقيقا في الأسم الثاني كانوا يمتهن مهنة الدعارة هذا مايقوله العهد القديم الذي تقدسه عليك الرجوع إليه لتعلم مدى الإستخفاف بعقولكم من قبل رجال الدين فهل بعد هذا المرجع مرجع



  رد مع اقتباس
إضافة رد

مواقع النشر (المفضلة)

الكلمات الدليلية (Tags)
المسيح, الكاتب, تاريخية, michael, شخصية, paulkovich, غير


الذين يشاهدون محتوى الموضوع الآن : 1 ( الأعضاء 0 والزوار 1)
 
أدوات الموضوع
اسلوب عرض الموضوع

تعليمات المشاركة
لا تستطيع إضافة مواضيع جديدة
لا تستطيع الرد على المواضيع
لا تستطيع إرفاق ملفات
لا تستطيع تعديل مشاركاتك

BB code is متاحة
كود [IMG] متاحة
كود HTML معطلة

الانتقال السريع

المواضيع المتشابهه
الموضوع كاتب الموضوع المنتدى مشاركات آخر مشاركة
مراجع تاريخية هامة فينيق ساحة التاريخ 29 02-04-2019 10:17 AM
نبذة تاريخية عن بدايات الكيمياء العضوية حكمت العلوم و الاختراعات و الاكتشافات العلمية 8 01-17-2017 08:44 PM
هل محمد شخصية تاريخية؟! HUMAN العقيدة الاسلامية ☪ 93 03-29-2015 09:13 PM
El escándalo de los manuscritos del Mar Muerto–Michael Baigent y Richard Leigh فينيق أرشيف : Articles in other languages 0 09-13-2014 08:45 AM
The Cambridge Companion to Atheism – Michael Martin فينيق أرشيف : Articles in other languages 0 08-19-2014 11:18 PM