Firsthand accounts of Christ seem to be missing -- why?

[Court]

I stole this topic from epi406's post on WWGHA, but we have some christians on this forum who I would like to answer it. Here's the link to the WWGHA thread.

epi406: There doesn't seem to be any firsthand written knowledge of Christ. Some early scholars such as Tacitus and Pliney the Younger make refrences to Christ and of course there is the New Testament. But there seems to be a complete lack of firsthand knowledge in any literature or records. Why do you think this is and what impact does this have on your view of Christainity?

John Not the Baptist: Quite simply, because Christ never existed. If he did exist, he didn't have any impact on society. It took a myth to grow into a legend before there was any impact on society at all. If such a person actually existed, others would have sought him out and written about him.

The fact that no reference to Christ exists outside of the New Testament proves that Christ didn't exist. Such tumultuous events would have been recorded elsewhere. It wasn't a remote part of the planet that was isolated for centuries at a time.The victors write the history. If the Romans successfully squelched Jesus (at least for a time) they would have written about it. It never happened.

[Asmodean Prime]

Josephus and other contemporary historians referred to Christ in their writings.  Also the dead sea scrolls, the essence of which I don't believe, nonetheless mention Christ and His influence on society.  Many other archeological evidence also bears witness to Christ.   It is said (by secular historians, I may add), that there is more historical and archeological evidence for Christ than there is for Alexander the great and other historical figures.

[Asmodean Prime]

Also, my belief in Christ is centered mainly on my own experience of His power and love in my life personally.  Purely historical, boring texts and writings would have meant nothing to me were it not for my own experiences in today's world, in my life.

That is the factor which clinches it for me.

[Court]

Onlyme, some sources? I'm not just going to take your word for it that "It is said by secular historians that there is more historical and archeological evidence for Christ than there is for Alexander the great and other historical figures." Yup, feeling a little doubtful about that information.
Don't spout history without something to back it up. I could tell you that historians don't believe Elvis existed, but what does it mean if I can't tell you who and where they said it?

[iplaw]

First there is very little information from first-century sources to begin with. Not much has survived the test of time from A.D. 1 to today. Blaiklock has cataloged the non-Christian writings of the Roman Empire (other than those of Philo) which have survived from the first century and do not mention Jesus. These items are:

An amateurish history of Rome by Vellius Paterculus, a retired army officer of Tiberius. It was published in 30 A.D., just when Jesus was getting started in His ministry.

An inscription that mentions Pilate.

Fables written by Phaedrus, a Macedonian freedman, in the 40s A.D.
From the 50s and 60s A.D., Blaiklock tells us: "Bookends set a foot apart on this desk where I write would enclose the works from these significant years." Included are philosophical works and letters by Seneca; a poem by his nephew Lucan; a book on agriculture by Columella, a retired soldier; fragments of the novel Satyricon by Gaius Petronius; a few lines from a Roman satirist, Persius; Pliny the Elder's Historia Naturalis; fragments of a commentary on Cicero by Asconius Pedianus, and finally, a history of Alexander the Great by Quinus Curtius.

Of all these writers, only Seneca may have conceivably had reason to refer to Jesus. But considering his personal troubles with Nero, it is doubtful that he would have had the interest or the time to do any work on the subject.

From the 70s and 80s A.D., we have some poems and epigrams by Martial, and works by Tacitus (a minor work on oratory) and Josephus (Against Apion, Wars of the Jews). None of these would have offered occasion to mention Jesus.

From the 90s, we have a poetic work by Statius; twelve books by Quintillian on oratory; Tacitus' biography of his father-in-law Agricola, and his work on Germany. [Blaik.MM, 13-16]

LIST OF LINKS:

Highly reliable sources. There are two of these: Tacitus and Josephus..

Moderately reliable sources. We find three: Thallus, Pliny, and Lucian.

Marginally reliable or unreliable sources. Three are in this class: Suetonius, Mara Bar-Serapion, and the Talmud.

[iplaw]

If the Romans successfully squelched Jesus (at least for a time) they would have written about it. It never happened.

This assertion seems to presume quite a bit about how and why the Romans would have categorized Jesus' life or death.  I find it hard to believe that the Romans kept a detailed list of every person they reprimanded or executed.  This argument looks back in hindsight taking the relative popularity of Jesus today in comparison with what his popularity was then and you can't compare the two.

[Big Mac]

Not to mention Court, there are "historians" who claim the Holocaust never happened. Just because it says "historians say" does not make it automatically true.

[iplaw]

Well then.  We just shouldn't read or believe anything anyone says, it's safer that way, unless they agree with us that is.

[Jassman]

This assertion seems to presume quite a bit about how and why the Romans would have categorized Jesus' life or death.  I find it hard to believe that the Romans kept a detailed list of every person they reprimanded or executed.  This argument looks back in hindsight taking the relative popularity of Jesus today in comparison with what his popularity was then and you can't compare the two.

This is actually a very good point. He would have been just another crazy loon trying to start a new religion from the foundation of Judaism to them.

[Big Mac]

Well then.  We just shouldn't read or believe anything anyone says, it's safer that way, unless they agree with us that is.

Well Ass-master, read my post again and really think about what I said before you try to put your word-dildo's in my mouth. Fuck you, fuck you, fuck you, you're cool, and fuck you I'm out!

[Jassman]

What's with the hostility? Posting primarily emotional has been a significant factor in the death of every good forum. Unless you are just joking around, but tone is hard to judge in text.

[Big Mac]

He drew first blood, I just want to return the favor by ripping out his heart and giving it to Kalima!

He put words in my mouth, nothing pisses me off more than having things attributed to me that I didn't say nor do.

But that's to be expected from Christians. They build things up that aren't there. Man where are some lions and collesiums when you need them?

[Jassman]

But that's to be expected from Christians.

"Putting words in your mouth" is wrong (I agree) but a few sweeping generalizations are okay?

[Big Mac]

My philosophy is simple, kill one our guys, we kill 10 of yours. A head for an eye. A fist for a finger, a life for an injury.

[iplaw]

Yawn...can we get back to the topic now.  Jassman, I think you get my point that it's like trying to reverse engineer historical context.  If you look into it, you will see that relatively little was recorded before and during the first century, and often even great historical figures were not written of until years, even decades after their passing.  Written historical mediums were not valued as greatly as they are today and oral repetitive history was the norm of the time.  Think about it...most people didn't even have the ability to read, what good were books back then?