Yes, Tacitus Mentions The Historical Jesus

#apologetics #historicaljesus #tacitus
It isn’t shocking that Christian texts are our primary source about Christian origins. After all, baseball fans tend to write about baseball history. American history buffs tend to write about American history.
But what does come as a surprise is that we can learn a fair bit about Jesus from early, non-Christian sources. One is the Roman historian Tacitus. But not everyone agrees that Tacitus wrote about Jesus or gives us any historical information about Jesus. A group of fringe scholars known as the Jesus mythicists raises four main objections to the reliability of Tacitus. In this video, I go over four mythicist objections to Tacitus and show that they don't really work.
Blog post: isjesusalive.com/sorry-jesus-...
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @testifyapologetics
Sources:
Finding the Historical Christ, Paul Barnett amzn.to/36LJop8
The Jesus Legend, Greg Boyd and Paul Rhodes Eddy amzn.to/2Lsq1Ke
Jesus Outside the New Testament: An Introduction to the Ancient Evidence, Robert Van Voorst amzn.to/3pUUek7
Can We Trust the Gospels?, Peter J Williams amzn.to/2YLT2Ue
Help support me: / isjesusalive
Outro music:
Equinox by Purrple Cat | purrplecat.com
Music promoted by www.free-stock-music.com
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported
creativecommons.org/licenses/...

[@TestifyApologetics]

"Considering subscribing" at the end 🤦🏿‍♂️😂

[@lileveyc]

It’s all good We all make mistakes

[@jkm9332]

Hey, I subscribed, so it worked. All good. :)

[@dinhoantonio5529]

I'm already in!!! This channel's mind-blowing☺☺☺. I'm really enjoying(specially the drawing part with the information). Keep it up our brother in Christ!!

[@lileveyc]

@@user-hm4zx4tj5s ok but Erik never said it did

[@jkm9332]

@@user-hm4zx4tj5s who is claiming that Tacitus is proof?

[@MortenBendiksen]

If Christians made it all up, the hoax is so elaborate and absolutely detailed I can only conclude the creator of the universe is behind it.

[@waterboy239]

😂😂

[@hahmed6308]

Con artists made up the story, Christians are the ones, who believe in the con.

[@IsaiahINRI]

Haha, agreed

[@CzarLazar1389]

Christianity, if there was no God, must be the most complex, interconnected and consistent web of lies ever told, by thousands of people from different cultures over the course of 3000 years. The messianic prophecies, the immense wisdom and the undisputable historicity of (at least) parts of the Bible are simply all too much for me not to believe the Bible.

[@Captain-Cosmo]

Your comment seems to contain a logical fallacy known as argumentum ad incredulitatem, or argument from incredulity. It implies that because something is difficult to comprehend or explain, it must be true or have a divine origin. However, this doesn't necessarily follow logically. The complexity or detail of a belief system doesn't necessarily correlate with its truthfulness. Many elaborate myths, legends, and religious systems exist across cultures and throughout history, but their complexity alone doesn't validate their claims. Additionally, the statement assumes that if Christianity were fabricated, it would be impossible for humans to create such an elaborate hoax without divine intervention. However, throughout history, humans have demonstrated remarkable creativity and ingenuity in creating elaborate stories, religions, and belief systems without the need for divine guidance. While the complexity of Christianity may be impressive to some, it doesn't serve as evidence for its truthfulness or divine origin.

[@joesteele3159]

It's amazing to me the extent that people will go to dismiss good evidence when it doesn't fit their presupposed lies.

[@upuridiotgodarse]

What evidence? Do you even know what evidence is?

[@joesteele3159]

@@upuridiotgodarse the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid. "the study finds little evidence of overt discrimination"

[@joesteele3159]

@@upuridiotgodarse It doesn't matter how good the evidence is. There are still those who will claim it isn't evidence despite the fact that it is. When I say evidence, I don't mean proof beyond doubt. Evidence is not always proof. That said; you can have enough pieces to a puzzle to conclude that it's more reasonable to believe something is true rather than believe it is not.

[@upuridiotgodarse]

@@joesteele3159 evidence for what? Hear say it's not evidence. You just presented text book definition of evidence. What is presented in this vid is far from it. Your mythical monster Jewish zombie god is logically impossible. Wheather some deranged Jewish preacher existed is not relevant in proving supernatural

[@allpraisestotmhalone2055]

@@joesteele3159 how come no verses of the creator speaking to this character called Jesus nor the creator instructing us to send our prayers in Jesus name to get to Him. Thus contradicting Him being a jealous God. The creator is one not trinity and He doesn't need a demi god to carryout His will on earth when He has angels

[@thecircumcisedheartofricha7344]

Former member of an atheist group and mocker of the faith. Thank you for these videos.

[@nerdatron817]

I want to win a soul one day! What about you?

[@war13death]

Welcome to the Christian family.

[@chriskitchen4772]

Wonderful news !!!

[@thomasthellamas9886]

@@nerdatron817 Sounds like a lot of responsibility

[@nerdatron817]

@@thomasthellamas9886 Hard work but someone has to do it.

[@Domtronic]

I'm a big fan of Jesus. :)

[@deeveevideos]

Jesus is Lord and that is awesome!

[@cormac5253]

Me too

[@whydidyouwin9981]

Surely, he is your Lord and Saviour also ? If not I pray that you will see and repent of your sins and come too Christ in Jesus name.

[@Domtronic]

@@whydidyouwin9981 Yes

[@crystalwilson867]

Jesus is the messiah. The devil wants the world to believe he isn't

[@hamobu]

Tacitus mentioned Christians and not Jesus. Tacitus wasn't even born when Jesus was crucified. He is basically just reporting what Christians claimed happened.

[@TheS0N]

But that would be using common sense, which isnt allowed in the Abrahamic faiths

[@Andres.Duran.J]

He mentioned the christ, not christians

[@hamobu]

@@Andres.Duran.J since Christ wasn't Jesus's name, he is just reporting what Christians themselves are telling him.

[@Thyalwaysseek]

@@Andres.Duran.J The Christ is the name given to the divine leader of Christians. He never mentioned the name Jesus.

[@bretiker7868]

@@hamobuMany or the vast majority of people weren’t born with last names then. ‘Christ’ or ‘Messiah’ were names given to Jesus to describe who he was to them, like how people who met Jesus before his mission called him Jesus the rabbi or teacher only to then start calling him Christ once he revealed his nature to them.

[@gusolsthoorn1002]

I recall a TY debate with an atheist who claimed that Tacitus was not a reputable historian. Ironically he had not read the article to the end because the author of the article had, in fact concluded that Tacitus was indeed a reputable historian! Of course that didn't change anything for the atheist.

[@robertlusty3004]

Many are ADHD or autistic. They fixate on an idea and can never admit being wrong

[@fatstrategist]

When in doubt, call the person or their source stupid!

[@ralph0149]

Citing a source without reading it through IS stupid. Kind of like playing hide and seek with the top of your head sticking out over the bush and snickering to yourself as to how clever you are.

[@connoryork6631]

He was a propagandist. He was a Flavian Senator. . .The Flavians wrote the New Testament with the help of Joeshus. Who was later bestowed the royal name Flavian. Joeshus went from POW in the Roman-Jewish Wars to Royalty. I wonder how that happened? Also back I'm the day historians who wrote the wrong things were rounded up by Rome, there books destroyed and they were killed. There was no real "historians" in Rome.

[@epmcgee]

Eyewitness accounts demonstrate that information to be unreliable. With Tacitus we don't even have a primary account, we had a tertiary account of a secondary account (since it isn't even eyewitness testimony that he's going on, but the document that recorded the apparent eyewitness testimony.) Tacitus may have upheld the standards of historian, that doesn't make him reliable.

[@wtk6069]

It's worth remembering that the gospels themselves were all four independently-written, same-era accounts later collected to settle this very question and spread the news they contain.

[@xtiannoregisteredsurname5124]

That's not true. Look it up. No biblical scholars claim that. They were written centuries later by multiple authors. Sorry dude. 🤷‍♂

[@nobrien1]

The gospels were written 40 - 60 years after Jesus's death by people who were not eyewitnesses and there are some contradictions across the four of them; hardly ironclad sources. Did you ever play the game of 'Telephone' as a kid? How did the story at the beginning of the chain compare to the one at the end of the chain? What do you think happened as, relatively uneducated people shared the story and translated it from Aramaic to Hebrew to Greek to English......

[@zimriel]

@@nobrien1 Although we are all in agreement that @wtk6069 is a hit-and-run coward who just dropped a lie on us - "telephone" isn't quite the analogy we want. All we need is to demonstrate the Synoptic Problem and word-for-word agreement between ANY of the four gospels in question. We don't even need to *solve* the Problem! That the Problem exists - that at least one gospel copied from one or more earlier written gospels - is proven by the Mark/Matthew correlations.

[@petronellaeiksson1699]

Sorry..non if them are written during the time of the life of Jesus.

[@Sbock86]

Binge watching your channel. Great work brother.

[@ragnapodewski4694]

There has been in 19th century a historian, who made a joke about the unbelievers between theologians. He made a scientific prove, Napoleon had never lived but was an Apollo myth: His name was like, his mother was named Letizia, he rose in the East and perished in the Western sea, island of St. Helena! When I was 12 years old I have read a summary and laughed. It is the right way to deal with Bultmann & Co.

[@michaelsnyder3871]

Actually, you aren't THAT wrong. A Catholic priest rewrote history in 1825, in which General Napoleon Bonaparte won many victories for France with the sage of his sovereign, Louis XVIII.

[@ThaNewDealer723]

Wonderful content and great presentation, thank you! Keep up the wonderful work, and be diligent!

[@lauchlanguddy1004]

pity its all utterly wrong, No one who supposedly met with christ wrote anything

[@orthodoxwitness2374]

I used to be an atheist and believed what the Jesus mythers said. I didn't know any real history, despite believing I was only atheist because I was so knowledgeable. Boy was I wrong.

[@anaccount8474]

All you mean is you were an atheist for bad reasons and are now a christian for even worse reasons

[@brick2392]

It is great seeing God at work in your life thank you for your comment

[@Elaphe472]

Oh boy.

[@SOG-xb4qh]

@@Elaphe472 Yes,,,here we go. 🙏

[@musthaveacamel2157]

lol , You were never an Atheist, It has nothing to do with how much knowledge someone has , An Atheist doesn't think the evidence for a God has been met, Nothing more

[@indianasmith8152]

Excellent!! You just keep the good stuff coming.

[@nachoooooo800]

Most underrated apologetics channel

[@ScienceNow-]

Another stupid remark on a stupid irrational channel about a fake messiah that never existed. Grow up.

[@ryanazzi5204]

Amazing brother 🔥🔥

[@samuelscheufler2747]

I appreciate your videos man. Hopefully commenting etc helps. Keep up the good work!

[@grawakendream8980]

glad to see comments on here, which maintain academic scrutiny this video doesn't hold. you have a belief, and are seeking details and shaping them to fit that belief, which is unscientific

[@mgvilaca]

You know what is unscientific? Denying the existence of Jesus. There's not a single PhD in Ancient History who denies Jesus existed. Years ago historian John Dickson said he'd eat a page of the Bible if anyone found a PhD in Ancient History who denies Jesus existed. It's hilarious how even the most skeptical scholars like Bart Ehrman keep wrecking Jesus mythycists in debates

[@loganpeterjones]

Good books in your description!!!

[@Chucksta-iwnl-]

let's go bro, your channel is quality

[@TestifyApologetics]

🙌

[@mistylover7398]

​@@TestifyApologeticsvideo doesn't prove anything still. Never will.

[@KenCunkle]

You're totally right that Tacitus' writing stands as good evidence of the existence and death of Jesus, or at least good evidence of it being a well-established tradition, even among non-believers. A couple of things, however: One is that Tacitus, besides mentioning and emphasizing stuff in accordance with his view of things, didn't really have access to a lot of the people or documentation that you sort of imply that he does, and this is especially true as one draws further away from when he was writing. Maybe Tacitus did have access to Roman archives, but it's rather unlikely that (a) records of individual crucifixions from the 30s A.D. in Jerusalem would have been stored there, or (b) he would have assiduously dug through them looking for evidence of Jesus' death. He mentions Jesus' death in passing, his primary point being not about Christians or Christianity, but rather about the character and acts of Nero, of whom he had a (properly) low opinion. He just wasn't going to go to that much trouble to fill in the history. Your statements about the wondrous virtues of Christian copyists is a tad overstated. In fact, there were oodles of texts that didn't survive, almost certainly because their contents would have jarred too badly with standard Christianity. (This is especially true in the first several centuries, when theological debate was hot and competent copyists were few.) This is probably the reason that the entire survival of Lucretius' "De Rerum Natura" hangs on very few manuscripts and was in fact lost for a thousand years or so. A lot of stuff was lost entirely. Some of this was no doubt because either Christian copyists didnt' like them or didn't think they were worth saving, or because they thought their time was better spent making another copy of "The Shepherd of Hermas" or the letters and writings of early church fathers., which you can still find in a 37-volumen edition, and which nobody outside specialists spends much time on. What aggravated this problem was the general collapse of Roman civilization and literacy , and whether Christianity was a symptom or a cause of this I will leave to your judgment.

[@michaelsnyder3871]

There are now about 4,000 manuscripts of Christian scripture dating from 180 CE to the 17th century. You can now follow the copyists of certain families of manuscripts as they delete, drop, duplicate, rewrite and simply misspell words. And you are right about the "orthodoxy" sweeping the heretics and opposition under the rug, at least until the Nag Hammadi manuscripts were found. We only know about Marcion because his heresy is attacked in four books. Some early Church fathers were written out of Eusebius because they didn't agree with the dogma then current, despite those writers being correct dogma in their time. Two excellent examples are the Book of Marcus (Mark is not a Roman, Greek or Jewish name, being an aliteration of Marcus, such as in Mark Anthony), the oldest copies of which end with the women running from the tomb in fear. Or the way women were written out of Paul's Epistle to the Romans.

[@Ron-dx9wq]

Tacitus was born in 56 AD, so he was just repeating what he was told. Not an eye witness.

[@bc4yt]

Repeating what he was told by whom?

[@Ron-dx9wq]

@bc4yt who knows? The point is his "evidence" is hearsay. Proof of nothing.

[@katrinaanon1038]

He doesn't need to be an eye witness. He would be able to tell us what was happening to Christians during the latter half of the 1st Century, and that is significant too. Writing was very expensive then, and the other significant thing is that these writings survived the millenias with enough copies to read them today. That alone indicates they were consider significant.

[@bc4yt]

@@rickedwards7276 lol, you had best throw out most of history then since most historical material is not written by eyewitnesses. But I'm guessing you only apply this standard of evidence for Jesus, right? And even then, that's excluding the eyewitness accounts that later became scripture. Either totally oblivious to the fact that the gospels and NT letters of Peter and James were circulating independently for 200 years before they and others were compiled into the Bible, or, just simply biased against them because... reasons.

[@bc4yt]

@@rickedwards7276 uhuh... Except the early date for Mark is 55AD, and all the NT was almost certainly written before 70AD as none of them give any hint of the destruction of the Temple, which, by the way, Josephus records James, Jesus' brother, having been thrown off of to his death because he refused to recant his testimony about Jesus. That happened in Josephus' time.

[@ora_et_labora1095]

Once again, best channel online. Hands down. May God bless you richly!

[@Venom96930]

I literally saw some atheist arguing that it was not "Christus" but "Chrestus" Which is Complete different for them.

[@petery6432]

Suetonius was the one who mentioned Chrestus

[@lauchlanguddy1004]

no one met Christ and wrote about it

[@vaskaventi6840]

Commenting for the algorithm, great video!

[@TestifyApologetics]

Thanks!

[@Christian_Maoist.]

Hi Erik, I've been doing a lot of digging around for the historicity of Christ and one thing I've seen pop up over and over again is there could be "15-18 sources for Christ" if this is true, perhaps an idea for a future video? When trying to hunt down all these sources I can only find the commonly known sources like Josephus, Tacitus and Celcus.

[@TestifyApologetics]

Some sources may confirm that Jesus existed and perhaps even parallel some aspects of the Gospel accounts, but the information is meager and uncertain, like Thallus, Seutonius, or Mara Bar Serapion. To name a few. And some are considered to be more valuable, like Josephus and Tacitus. The Thallus reference particularly interests me and I may do a video on it.

[@iamkyle42]

I think this just kinda proves Josephus and the Flavians we're in on making him up together

[@j.gstudios4576]

@@iamkyle42 😂

[@iamkyle42]

@@j.gstudios4576 ??

[@j.gstudios4576]

@@iamkyle42 oh I thought you were joking sorry

[@filosofiaecosmovisaocrista4523]

Can i translate your videos to portuguese and upload them to my channel giving the proper credits to you, your channel, your blog and your ministry in the description? Here in Brazil we, sadly, face a lacking on good/scholarly christian apologetics. People believe in christianity without having access to the intellectual side of it, and we want to change that as much as we can. It would help a lot if you accepted the request. Anyways, congratulations for your work!

[@TestifyApologetics]

Sure, sounds good to me. Let me know what you need from me.

[@filosofiaecosmovisaocrista4523]

@@TestifyApologetics Well, we don't need much apart from your authorization. But a request we would like to make is for you to produce videos about the following articles you wrote: DID EARLY CHRISTIAN SCRIBES REALLY COMPLETELY FAKE THE JOSEPHUS TESTIMONIUM? ARE CHRISTIAN APOLOGISTS GUILTY OF COMMITTING THE SPIDER-MAN FALLACY? WHY EVERYONE SHOULD BELIEVE THAT THE APOSTLE JOHN WROTE THE FOURTH GOSPEL and the articles that deals with the non-christian sources that mentions Jesus, refuting the arguments presented by skeptics against the autenticity of these documents and elaborating on what they say. I say that because here in Brazil some arguments that you addresses on your articles are the arguments the brazilian-atheists-youtubers-popularizers guys use in favor of Jesus' mythicism. So this would be a sort of indirect response. Of course, you don't have to try to desperately and as quick as possible produce these videos like if it was some type of emergency. We respect your time and limitations and we are patient to wait the necessary period.

[@yaruqadishi8326]

Christianity is Sooo False Brazil is waking up and coming to Heaven and Good Earth again and far long off from Hell like christianity.

[@truthisbeautiful7492]

@@yaruqadishi8326 but Christian religion is true. All of the evidence shows that fact.

[@yaruqadishi8326]

@@truthisbeautiful7492 no all evidence shows that it's absolutely false you don't know any evidence you don't get to blabber things and Christian religions absolutely false but Hinduism like Buddhism and Zoroastrianism and troop faiths are true and we confirm it with evidence facts history God truth Revelation spiritual truths after life creation judgment sin etc at all points to our beliefs way so but it doesn't prove yours yours is cheats and deceived and takes words that don't belong to it and uses it a deception to mask but in fact it has none of those things and it is nothing but cult false belief of Christianity he's been exposed as lies just like the Satan guy has been exposed to nothing but devils and devils and more devils and Christianity sorry to tell you this but the truth it hurts and the light is shining now and there's nothing you can do you can't sidestep out of it all you can do is face it and repent now come back to the true gods or come to the True Almighties from the Lots of Devils you are enslaved.

[@anarchorepublican5954]

...🍸extreme skepticism is a sort of intoxicating cocktail of arrogance, ignorance and gullibility...

[@Rambler-mj3io]

😂🤣😂🤣

[@richbob9155]

extreme scepticism is the bare minimum in todays world. Any less and you are a fool. Most things are lies and its rare to find truly honest people online.

[@wpriddy]

It is also the basis of all science.

[@anarchorepublican5954]

@@wpriddy ...nope... not really...doubt( or skepticism) has very little to do with it...rather, the basis of all Science is a deep seated confidence(Latin "con"= with+"Fides"=Faith) in the discernible Order and Laws of the Universe ...

[@CatETru]

Great work!!

[@user-lm7we7xb4g]

Not only existed, but suffered and died for my salvation...

[@davio7031]

I am not a skeptic, I am in fact god fearing… videos like yours are essential in this age of deception and revisionism.

[@VintagePeach]

So many great videos! You need more subs.

[@martinecheverria5968]

Hey Brother, it would be awesome if you made a video of the points in favor and against the authenticity of the shroud of turin!

[@TestifyApologetics]

TBH, I haven't looked into it much and my initial reaction to what I have seen is skepticism.

[@martinecheverria5968]

@@TestifyApologetics yep, mine too. Bur Gary Habermas and Mike Licona think is is probably authentic 🤔

[@nerdatron817]

@@TestifyApologetics It is a forgery

[@youtubezcy]

Proves christians existed.

[@BOMBI77766]

commenting because you have something to say < commenting to boost the video on youtube.

[@adteioseph4237]

This is such a great channel

[@CalvinSnow-ks3cl]

Tacitus - Born: c. 56 AD He repeated what someone else said

[@mgvilaca]

By that stupid logic we can't trust any bug historical event in history which hasn't been reported by eyewitnesses - which would mean everything that happened in the past must be doubted. It's incredible how no one doubts Alexander the Great existed when his oldest reference dates to 300 years after him. No credible scholar denies Jesus existed, not even the most liberal ones, this denial must stop

[@zuutlmna]

Never read into this. I do remember my art history instructor at Shasta College stated during his lectures that Jesus is mentioned in numerous writings/sources from Classical Antiquity..

[@wpriddy]

He is not. Anywhere. No mentions outside of pilate. And all he says is that he crucified a guy named jeshua. A very common name. He crucified 8 jeshuas if I remember correctly.

[@lileveyc]

Woah Thanks I learned something new I didn’t know even the way Tacitus wrote Goes against the idea that it was a Christian forgery

[@teastrainer3604]

Tacitus wrote that in 116 AD, when there were Christians in Rome. It proves nothing.

[@connoryork6631]

​@@teastrainer3604 Tacitus helped the Flavian Dynasty predate Christianity to make to appear that Jesus existed so that his "predictions" would validate Romes agenda against the jews. "Jesus predicted 40 years ago that Rome would destroy Jerusalem if they didn't listen" (which they did in 69-70 A.D) "Oh wow, Jesus must have existed because he was right" It was a self fulfilled prophecy by Rome from a man who never existed.

[@xyrilgatchalian8823]

TACITUS DEFENDED! TACITUS' statement: "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 Judæa, 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." LIE #1 * R. T. France states that the TACITUS passage is "at best" just TACITUS repeating what he had heard through Christians. (WRONG!❌) REFUTES - First of all, TACITUS is widely known as One of the Greatest Roman Historian during Ancient times. The Annals was Tacitus' final work, and modern historians generally consider it his greatest writing. Historian Ronald Mellor calls it "Tacitus's crowning achievement", which represents the "pinnacle of Roman historical writing". - Based on the context of the passage, it is very ridiculous to believe that TACITUS heard Christians say that Christianity was a "mischievous superstition" and "evil". The words are TOO NEGATIVE to come from Christians. - Paul Eddy states, as Rome's preeminent historian, TACITUS was generally known for checking his sources and was not in the habit of reporting gossip - TACITUS was also likely to have had access to official Roman documents of the time and did not need other sources - Modern scholars believe that as a Roman senator, Tacitus had access to Acta Senatus-the Roman senate's records-which provided a solid basis for his work. (The annals by Cornelius Tacitus, Anthony John Woodman 2004 ISBN 0-87220-558-4 pages x to xx) - TACITUS was a member of the Quindecimviri sacris faciundis, a council of priests whose duty it was to supervise foreign religious cults in Rome, which as Van Voorst points out, makes it reasonable to suppose that he would have acquired knowledge of Christian origins through his work with that body. LIE #2 * TACITUS' statement was a Christian scribe interpolation (WRONG!❌) REFUTES - Andreas Köstenberger states that the tone of the passage towards Christians is far too negative to have been authored by a Christian scribe - Van Voorst also states that the passage is unlikely to be a Christian forgery because of the pejorative language used to describe Christianity - TACITUS clearly stated in the passage that Christianity was the "most mischievous superstition" and "the EVIL" in which Judæa was the source! - No true Christians would dare call their own faith as a "mischievous superstion" or "evil". This highly proves that the statement of TACITUS was genuine and not a forgery by Christian scribes! LIE #3 * TACITUS made a mistake by calling Pontius Pilate a "procurator" instead of a "prefect". (WRONG!❌) REFUTES - The fact that TACITUS called Pontius Pilate a "Procurator" instead of a "Prefect" only increases the authenticity of the statement and proves that it was really TACITUS who wrote the text and not interpolated by a Christian scribe! - Also, it was natural for TACITUS to use the word "Procurator" since the word was commonly used by Roman authorities during Ancient Rome. The word Procurator, Latin Procurator, plural Procuratores, [refers to] government financial agent in ancient Rome. Procurators were regularly appointed to official posts in the imperial administration of the provinces or in the departments of the imperial government concerning such matters as the grain supply, the mint, and the mines. Procurators of provinces supervised imperial finances in their respective jurisdictions. This matches Pontius Pilate's responsibility, since he had the power to inflict capital punishment, and he was also responsible for collecting tributes and taxes, and for disbursing funds, including the minting of coins. (Schwartz, Daniel R. (1992). "Pontius Pilate". In Freedman, David Noel; Herion, Gary A.; Graf, David F.; Pleins, John David; Beck, Astrid B. (eds.). The Anchor Bible Dictionary. 5. New York: Doubleday. pp. 395-401. ISBN 0-385-19360-2.) ADDITIONALS: * Edward Gibbon (an English Historian who deeply studied the fall of Roman Empire) considered Tacitus the very model of the philosophic historian * Paul Eddy and Gregory Boyd argue that it is "firmly established" that Tacitus provides a non-Christian confirmation of the crucifixion of Jesus" * William L. Portier has stated that the consistency in the references by Tacitus, Josephus and the letters to Emperor Trajan by Pliny the Younger reaffirm the validity of all three accounts * Scholars generally consider TACITUS' reference to be of historical value as an independent Roman source about early Christianity that is in unison with other historical records * the editor of the 1907 Oxford Edition treated the passage (TACITUS' Annals) as genuine * Scholars such as Bruce Chilton, Craig Evans, Paul Eddy and Gregory Boyd agree with John Meier's statement that "Despite some feeble attempts to show that this text is a Christian interpolation in TACITUS, the passage is obviously genuine."

[@xyrilgatchalian8823]

This will silence all of the lies

[@xyrilgatchalian8823]

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son (Jesus Christ) that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. John 3:18 He that believeth on Him (Jesus Christ) is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. John 11:25 Jesus said to her, " I Am the resurrection, and the life: He that believeth in Me, though He were dead, yet shall He live:"

[@xyrilgatchalian8823]

John 6:35 And Jesus said unto them, I Am the bread of life: He that cometh to Me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on Me shall never thirst.

[@xyrilgatchalian8823]

John 12:46 I Am come a light into the world, that whosoever believeth on Me should not abide in darkness.

[@xyrilgatchalian8823]

John 14:12 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on Me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go unto My Father.

[@LorolinAstori]

I’m not sure you are understanding what independent sources are. Tacitus is reciting at best third hand accounts. That is not how this works.

[@propertyvideos5598]

Better discount a lot of history. And it’s actually 2nd hand sources since he has contemporary documents.

[@LorolinAstori]

@@propertyvideos5598 there are no contemporary documents from any one claiming to cite an eyewitness of Jesus crucifixion. At best there are tertiary sources for Tacitus, someone who was born decades after Jesus died.

[@rscotthudson1959]

Well done my friend!

[@purposedrivennihilist7983]

Nice video keep it up!

[@Christian_Maoist.]

Commenting just to try and bump this epic video

[@alantasman8273]

All of the apostles except for John suffered horrible deaths for their preaching of Christ's Gospel. None of them recanted under threat of death of what they had witnessed Jesus say and do. One does not go to the grave for a known lie.

[@DonMeaker]

Tacitus was born long after Jesus. Never met the guy, has no evidence. Doesn't mention an historical Christ, but rather, a mythical christ.

[@paulszymanski2513]

Tacitus did not source his information which is odd for a historian.

[@katrinaanon1038]

You need to remember Greco-Roman histories are written differently from 21st Century histories. What we do in the 21st Century when a true history is written is quite a bit different from a 1st Century history. I am not saying the author's conclusion about Tacitus are correct without a lot of investigation, but his conclusions are rather interesting and worth confirming.

[@paulszymanski2513]

@@katrinaanon1038 Jesus was a popular name. His name wasnt Jesus Christ so it makes no sense for Romans to document him as Christ. Wasnt Barabas name Jesus too?

[@connoryork6631]

​@@katrinaanon1038Tacitus was a Flavian Senator. The Dynasty that ruled after Nero. The Dynasty that ruled 40 years after Jesus made many grave predictions about the Jewish people. The Dynasty that captured Josephus in the Roman-Jewish Wars. Who was later bestowed the Royal name Flavian. Tacitus is cited in regards to The Fires of Rome. Which happened under Nero when he was about 8 years old. Tacitus doesn't site a previous source because there isn't one. He is the "citation". This is propraganda not history. Everything points back to the Flavian Dynasty when it comes to Jesus

[@epmcgee]

@@katrinaanon1038 the whole point is that there was less standard to the writings in those times. Tacitus is writing in such a way that it seems like he's sourcing another document for his writing, so his is a third party account of a second party account that was written based on eyewitness testimony. That's not reliable to any degree. And as someone suggests there were plenty of people called Jesus. To the extent that there were numerous "Jesus the Messiah" walking around AND performing miracles. There is even written record of it, but obviously the orthodox views claim that they're falsehoods based on the real Jesus without demonstrating evidence to the contrary. It's a strawman argument at best.

[@epmcgee]

@@connoryork6631 Jesus was dead by 33 CE. Tacitus was only born in 56 CE. There is no way Tacitus can be considered a primary source for this information. Congratulations on demonstrating why he could have been considered a primary source for another set events, and establishing the baseline to determine how he isn't a primary source for Jesus.

[@erickrobertson7089]

I was not aware of this. Thank you.

[@cliffmays442]

I suggest if you can I would change your title. Because when I first read it I thought you were saying that Jesus was a myth. I enjoyed this as I am both a Christian and student of history.

[@portia934]

Creative way to communicate truth. Keep it up!

[@theexplorechanneluk7934]

Pontious pilots letter is even more compelling as it’s an actual letter to the Roman leader Tiberius at the time Jesus exsisted and about him

[@valentino3228]

I've never heard about this hsigorical record, gonna check it.

[@GH-hh8cm]

It’s proven to be fake

[@richardlong5751]

Wow! Someone in the 21st century believes that something in the Pilate Cycle was written by Pilate.

[@theexplorechanneluk7934]

@@richardlong5751 wow I later found out that it was a later writing chill out.

[@SheikhN-bible-syndrome]

Dude its fake it even reads like a low quality Facebook mem come on use your brain you can do it

[@richardlong5751]

You dismiss the possibility of Christian scribes changing the Annals. The surviving text exists as just two lines of copy: one contains the first half and one the second half. There is, however, a gap of two years from 29-31 AD. Early Christians believed that the crucifixion was in 30 AD. Perhaps the scribes saw no mention of Jesus in that period so chose not to copy it.

[@markvoelker6620]

Very interesting and balanced presentation. Thank you.

[@TonyBMW]

Never mind the dude was born almost six decades AD.

[@theworldisastage1984]

he was born 23 years after the figure claimed to be Jesus, a revolutionary communist rabbi, died. he didn't even reference the character until 116, or... drumroll... 83 years after the character Jesus died. and people claim this is credible evidence😂

[@GabrielEmerald777]

Tacitus' statement that the death of Jesus happened during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of Pontius Pilate (A Roman Procurator/Prefect), isn't something Tacitus would assert based on Christian "Claims," but rather on Roman Governmental sources. Tacitus didn't depend on marginalized and persecuted Christians for historical information regarding his own governmental bodies. Others in your camp also claim that the Roman Empire officials and its historians didn't keep record, or know who their Emperor & officials were that governed the Empire and Judea (A ROMAN PROVINCE) a measly 80 years earlier. This is a pathetically ridiculous and frivolous argument. The result of bias and being in denial.

[@I_renounce_satan]

@@theworldisastage1984 Much MUCH nearer 2024

[@theworldisastage1984]

@@I_renounce_satan whatever you think you meant to say, clearly isn't what you think it is. your response makes me think you just had a stroke

[@jamieSp69]

You are missing the point. He was a impotant Roman figure who would have access to Roman documents and information.

[@petermedcalf1191]

Evidence for the existence of Jesus is one thing, but this doesn't prove his supposedly divine nature.

[@lauchlanguddy1004]

what evidence? its all second or third or fourth hand

[@DarthBane84]

Great video😍

[@HepCatJack]

There are also Indian accounts of Jesus / Yssa spending his youth in India there are books on this subject. Chinese records: Ancient Chinese records of a day in 31AD where they described the darkening of the sun for a prolonged period. This is what the Bible said occurred on the day of Christ's crucifixion: "Yin and yang have mistakenly switched and the sun and the moon were eclipsed. The sins of all the people were on one man. Pardon was proclaimed to all under heaven" (Chronicles of Emperor Guang Wu 7th year)

[@eddiericks6554]

Jesus is to big for small minded people to take the risk of believing in Christ is a huge leap forward in the right direction good luck 🍀

[@JHimminy]

It’s a huge leap for me to go from the gospels to Paul, much more from the gospels to the Catholic Church. I can’t see how you read the gospels, and then decide “now I’ll let the pharisee, the loyal Roman interpret this for me.” Bosh! In the contest between “the son of god” and the son of a tent maker, you side with the tent maker.

[@barrywilson4276]

I find it fascinating that for 400 years after Tacitus wrote the tract there was no mention of Christians or Nero persecuting them. Some say it was fraudulently added but surely it's a miracle.

[@Thyalwaysseek]

Yes it's not like the Catholic Church has been rewriting history, we can totally trust them.

[@musthaveacamel2157]

Is Cancer in babies a Miracle?, Don't forget God did that

[@Thyalwaysseek]

@@musthaveacamel2157 God or the microplastics leeching into every mother's placenta?

[@theworldisastage1984]

​@@musthaveacamel2157God also created evil according to those parasites that wrote it

[@DoyleHargraves]

@@musthaveacamel2157 God made us and the world perfect. When Adam chose to sin, that perfection ended.

[@JelMain]

To be exact, Tacitus talks about Christians, which is only secondary evidence two generations later of Christ. James is well documented, not least in Josephus, but the mention of Christ there is a linguistic anachronism, politely termed a "gloss", added to align texts: in harsher terms, a forgery. The problem is that both names are metanyms, Chrestos meaning "the annointed one" - it's modern derivative is "chrysm" - and Jesus, originally Joshua, "of the House of Jesse". Study's rather stalled recently, and it's possible it can go no further. More seriously, evidential text surrenders to the sceptics. I've a decent share of the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize truly belonging on high, as I was predestined to make some huge contributions in the European State Department. Alone, I was no better than any other. Inspired, I delivered, time after time after time. Repentant confession's the key to clear channels as a Seer Medium - some of London's top psychiatrists and half the Government have seen it for themselves first hand, inspiring the search for weirdos and misfits. The Boss exists, and guides those he's picked - my predestination starts in the early 13th Century.

[@humbleopulence]

Christus means anointed. Chrestus means useful or good or righteous, also tool (useful). It says Chrestus in Tacitus. We even have a manuscript (c. 10th century, I think) where the e in Chrestus was deliberately crossed out and changed with an i so it would align with the name Christ. That already proves the Jews were revolting at the instigation of a man called Chrestus. Chrestus is usually a slave name. It's not a mistake one from that culture would make. Anointed and useful are not the same. Therefore these Chrestians are followers of someone who is useful, good or righteous. Righteous here can mean the teacher of righteousness of the Qumran sect, which is proven to be connnected to the Sicarii, who are elsewhere referred to as Sicarii Essenes. So... It's likely these Chrestiani were actually Jewish messianic revolutionaries (think ISIS but Jewish). Not peace loving Christians... But Christians do love to insert themselves falsely into the historical record and claim occurrences that never occurred to them ,so.... There you have it

[@JelMain]

@@humbleopulence This is also why Rome sat on the Essene scrolls for 40 years. The classic sicarius moment was when the Temple authorities came for him in Gethsemane, Peter drew his "sword" and cut off the High Priest's servant's ear. But to me, it's all superfluous. I've dealt with the real thing for 40 years, making a serious difference, although I insist the glory isn't mine. but belongs to my inspiration.

[@Enochphilw]

I saved this to my workman playlist, you obviously are a 'good' one.

[@hwd7171]

05:22. I just had an atheist make that claim, praise Jesus for guiding me to your answer.

[@connoryork6631]

Jesus never existed.

[@hwd7171]

@@connoryork6631 "You just look silly"- Bart Ehrman.

[@connoryork6631]

@@hwd7171 Tacitus was a Flavian propagandist just like Josephus. Tacitus was a Roman Senator. . .I know 10,000 times more history than Tacitus ever could. It's ironic you think I'm silly for not believing a 2000 year old politician. You're fucking loony toon dude

[@connoryork6631]

@@hwd7171 Tacitus was a Flavian Senator i.e proprandist and so was Josephus. You believe a 2000 year old politician and call me dum? You're a bright one

[@jasonfedder1657]

It's worth mentioning that claiming Christ never existed is pretty new. They used to only question his miracles or the resurrection saying he was just a man not a god.

[@wesbaumguardner8829]

Not really. People have been questioning Jesus' existence for a long time now. It's just that for well over 1,000 years anyone that did so was subject to a brutal murder at the hands of "mostly peaceful" Christians. Most people do not like being burnt at the stake for "heresy" and remained quiet. Christians also had a tendency to censor and/or burn texts they disagreed with, so there is also that.

[@louism8911]

Still, what about the stars? Because there is waters above us which you can tell when you zoom the stars. That is the firmament. Why do the stars "twinkle" when observed with the naked eye? Because of waters....just exactly as described in the Genesis. So, when doubt, remind yourself that you're standing at God's original design of Earth (flat earth) since Nasa's stuff is just the sci-fi (science fiction).

[@FungiFarms]

This facially false.

[@connoryork6631]

Its because the Flavian Dynasty has been outed as the creators of the New Testament

[@GavTatu]

tacitus wasn't even born until about fifty past Jesus' supposed death. anything he wrote regarding jesus was simply based upon stories, reliable or not, second or third hand that people were telling about jesus decades later. all it really proves is that people believed that jesus existed and stuff happened to him.

[@destroyingangel7346]

Where did Tacitus get those shades, it looks different from all the other ones you fit onto the other church Fathers and Christ's disciples?

[@brucetucker4847]

Well, they're _pagan_ shades, so...

[@piage84]

Tacitus also says that Vespasianus performed miracles

[@TestifyApologetics]

I've went over this in another video.

[@FungiFarms]

That video was misleading trash as well. 1/10 wouldn't bang​@@TestifyApologetics

[@Esico6]

⁠@@FungiFarms You should backup your ridiculous claims.

[@JHimminy]

@@Esico6if they’re ridiculous (“deserving only of ridicule”) then why do you ask for evidence? Bad faith?

[@Enochphilw]

Why this desperate attack on faith? Leave proof to science and faith to things of faith. Those who do know christ personally know we don't believe in fairy tales or just anything. It's not supposed to be about believing in God, but believing ( obeying ) God who actually loves us and his commandments are not grievous. Hell is the grave.

[@ezra710word]

Tacitus, Lucan, Pliny the Younger, Suetonius and Josephus all mention Christ.

[@WMedl]

This is a small side remark in the narration of the big fire in Rome giving some information he could have heard from Christians. Without any source given it is not a strong evidence but important for the history of early christians. By the way, the recursion to Josephus and Philo concerning the use of "procurator" is doubtful because both wrote in Greek and therefor never used this term.

[@dravenamor6052]

Awesome videos

[@johnloftin2461]

I'm a skeptic, but do enjoy your presentations. You seem to stay calm. It's a trick I've not seen often with religion. While this information has been around for awhile, it seems like most of the folks I know never learned it. Good show.

[@caleburias5596]

Do you believe in Jesus Christ?

[@johnloftin2461]

@@caleburias5596 not the one christians believe in. I think Jesus was a common name in that time. I don't believe one died and came back from the dead. I've known about Tacitus, Pliny, and Josephus as kind of baseline apologetics from the late 90s.

[@ghostitious]

@@johnloftin2461 I see, you’re extremely free to see our beliefs, you’re welcome here brother, Jesus loves you so much.

[@turnfrmsinorhell_jesus]

​@@johnloftin2461🕊️Jesus was real believers in him and the bible experience the Holy spirit wich no other faith has. Jesus was not just anyone , he was God's son in the flesh and his life was blameless that's why he shines brighter than the sun now in the Holy spirit realm and there's no darkness in him . Buddha , Mohammed and Alan watts are in their graves. Jesus grave is empty he is risen. Go to any church on earth that believes in Jesus and ask those believers what Jesus from the bible did in their lives and you will hear , broken addictions , life long grudges healed , rebellion replaced with obedience , the sick healed , demons cast out , miracles happen and much more. Jesus died for our sins we must believe in him repent and turn from sins and get baptised to enter paradise instead of hell for rebellion. Once we obey the teachings Jesus gave we experience great peace and joy as the Lord fills the void that nothing else in our lives could fill. Please read bible book Luke to know how to be saved. Peace and blessings

[@asherjason6270]

I guess that's checkmate...(only for reasonable people, not for the foolish)

[@michaelwallace2487]

If there is any truth regarding Tacitus record, he was referring to Christos who was really Chrishna, as Apollonius of Tyana brought the Hindu prophet to Rome in the first century. That was the beginning of Christianity. Actually, Chrishna had been in the Mediterranean much earlier than that, but it simply caught on under Apollonius and Chrestus, who had also brought Chrishna to Rome as well, however, they were rivals.

[@mr.beatfan8814]

Was Tacitus an ancestor of the emperor of the same name?

[@gordonsirmond9584]

The existence of a cult worshiping Christos some 30 to 50 years after the date of the crucification is not proof of the existence of an historical Jesus. All it proves is that there was a cult which later became Christianity to claim more than that is to exhibit great confirmation bias

[@lauchlanguddy1004]

yep, but faith not fact. If he was so great why were there not volumes written ststues raised, crowds noted, letters sent to Rome... zip, nothing.. crickets

[@tom_curtis]

The most obvious point about the quote from Tacitus is that he does not have his knowledge of Jesus from official records (and certainly not from personal knowledge). We know this because he gives the name of Jesus as Christus, not Jesus. Had there indeed been an official record from Pilate that Tacitus consulted, you can be sure Pilate would have given Jesus actual name rather than calling him simply 'Christus' (which means the same as Messiah). But if Tacitus did not obtain his knowledge of Jesus from official records, he can only have obtained it from the Christians themselves (perhaps second hand). It follows from this that Tacitus is only evidence that there were Christians in Rome in the time of Nero (something we already know from Paul's letters). "Testify"'s fallacy is the same as concluding that the angel Moroni is real simply because a tribe, named after him (the Mormons) exists even to this day.

[@theworldisastage1984]

bingo

[@Enochphilw]

His name was not Jesus but Yeshua

[@tom_curtis]

@@Enochphilw, that is speculation. What is known is that the Greek rendering of his name was Ἰησοῦς (pronounced ee-ay-soos) and that there were several Hebrew names that were transcribed into Greek in that form, including Yehoshua (Joshua), Yeshua, Yeshu and even Yishu.

[@theworldisastage1984]

@@Enochphilw the rabbis refer to that character as yeshu. they would know, they engineered the script

[@zimriel]

@@theworldisastage1984 The rabbis were reacting to Christian-Palaestinian and Syriac Christians, who were preaching and writing in Aramaic. They'd already backtranslated Jesous to Isho' or Yeshu'.

[@anonymike8280]

Why didn't they just put it all on thumb drive?

[@jamesthurber4730]

It's amazing the Christians were in Rome so early and in such quantity! Thanks.

[@iranianskeptic]

There's not enough evidence for those who believe that Jesus didn't exist.

[@Tzimiskes3506]

@Iranian Skeptic the evidence is there whether it triggers mythicists or not.

[@tomatoisnotafruit5670]

it's more than enough, Tacitus said Pontius Pilate killed Christ. Now please explain to me how a Roman official can kill someone who doesn't exist? lmao.

[@FungiFarms]

A very good video for people that don't like to think for themselves or read books, or look at dates, or understand their significance.

[@kubhlaikhan2015]

Tacitus, Flavius Josephus, Pliny the Younger, and Suetonius all attest to a historical Christ. Its also very important that they wrote about this long before the time of Constantine who is the emperor most often accused of inventing modern Christianity. Whether the facts or practices bore much or any resemblance to the modern version of the religion is another question entirely.

[@0nlyThis]

Did Tacitus confirm also that Jesus was the Christ, as the author of the gospel narrative attributed to Mark claims - and the son of God as well?

[@JacobB-py5yu]

But why would he?

[@anaccount8474]

Anything written after the gospels cannot be considered as independent. Tacitus was writing in the 2nd century and just reporting what christians believed. If you had writings from a Roman or Jewish source dated to the 30s AD that would be interesting. As it stands there are zero contemporary sources referring to Jesus. That doesn't mean he didn't exist but it does show the Jesus recorded in the gospels is largely if not entirely mythical.

[@babylonisfallen4411]

There are also no contemporary sources documenting the conquests of alexander the great and thus: alexander never existed and is just a myth.

[@jameslay1489]

@@babylonisfallen4411 except there is and we have multiple independent sources to confirm that Alexander existed. We have statues, we have coinage, we have the people he conquered stories about him. We have more evidence of Alexander the Great than for Jesus.

[@tomatoisnotafruit5670]

Why would a Roman official spread lies about his fellow Roman official? Tacitus did not just report what Christians believed, Tacitus said that his fellow ROman official executed Christ. This isn't hearsay, this is an official describing the actions of another official. If he wa merely stating hearsay, he would say this is an allegation that Christians make about Pontius Pilate instead of saying oh yep Pontius Pilate killed the Christians group founder and leader.

[@jameslay1489]

@@tomatoisnotafruit5670 The only thing you can really get from Tacitus is that a man named Jesus existed. Everything else is just pure speculation. The fact is, there is no contemporary historian or even Roman document from the time that says Jesus even existed. Whatever documents that Tacitus was using is unavailable to us now.

[@tomatoisnotafruit5670]

@@jameslay1489 Read his words again, He is talking about a fellow Roman Official, and he is not speculating or restating allegations, he is stating a factual event. You guys are just in denial since his text quote easily destroyed your argument of that Jesus never existed lmao.

[@TimothyOBrien1958]

He is just reporting what he heard. He's not an eyewitness. Just because there were Christians, and that they talked about him does not prove that Tacitus knew anything about an historic Jesus. Fail, you do.

[@Tzimiskes3506]

Try coping harder mythicist. You fail to refute any of it. You must just he another average internet atheist with an intellect of absolute no use.

[@bakedbeans5494]

🤡

[@HaroldtheNihongoStudent]

Lol. Isn't knowledge something passed on and heard by other people? You can outrightly deny Tacitus just because he just "heard" it from somebody else. What about this? Peter and John wrote about Jesus and they are eye witness. But of course you would claim they fabricated it. Your arguments are as follows: 1. Don't believe the Gospels and the apostles of Jesus, who are eyewitnesses, they just made it up. 2. Don't believe those who heard the story of Jesus from others, it is just hearsay. If that is your argument, then you wouldn't believe anything. 😂😂😂

[@TimothyOBrien1958]

@@HaroldtheNihongoStudent Scholars today assert that these books were not written by the Apostle Peter. There is no proof of Peter's existence either. As for Tacitus, after the fire in Rome, Nero looked for a scapegoat. They picked on the Christians and the historian wrote about it. So, total bunk. No books were written by eyewitnesses.

[@HaroldtheNihongoStudent]

@@TimothyOBrien1958 Of course all you have to do is to conveniently deny every claim to prove your point. In the end you are the winner of your own argument. Lol.

[@michaelsnyder3871]

None of the Gospels are actually first-hand accounts. The Gospel according to Marcus (Mark was a Greek alliterative of Marcus, such as Mark Anthony) was a scribe translating for Peter who probably spoke Aramaic and maybe some Greek, but no Latin, who wrote down Peter's memories of Jesus as he remembered them and then compiled a gospel in Alexandria around 70-75 CE. Matthew was not the Apostle who was a former tax collector, who is named otherwise in that Gospel. Luke upfront says he is writing from oral and written tradition. And the writer of John simply says that the "Beloved Disciple" approves of this Gospel. Even Acts is shaky, being contradicted numerous times by Paul's own epistles. In fact, Paul's letters are the closest scripture to the time of Jesus. But even the Pastoral Epistles were forged under Paul's name in the late 2d century CE. The rest of the scripture, including Revelations were chosen from a mass of Christian scripture because custom and tradition identified their authors as Apostles or other important early Christians.

[@oliviastratton2169]

I'm an athiest, but I've never understood people who flat out deny Jesus existed. The evidence always seemed pretty solid to me. And I don’t get what anyone gains by arguing otherwise except satisfying an internal impulse towards contrarianism. We'll probably never get indisputable proof one way or another, you're never going to convince most Christian believers, and his effect on world history is very real regardless.

[@JHimminy]

Lol, if he didn’t exist, he didn’t have any impact on history, not any more than Aragorn or Tristan had. The Christ myth, however, has been monumentally formative.

[@oliviastratton2169]

@@JHimminy I mean, fictional characters can have an impact on the real world. Superman comes to mind as a modern example.

[@JHimminy]

@@oliviastratton2169 that’s what I said: the myth of Jesus has obviously been powerful and pervasive throughout history.

[@oliviastratton2169]

@@lucyferos205 It's pretty on par with the proof we have for John Henry though, and I've never seen people passionately argue he never existed.

[@2030-investinheaven]

Praise Jesus Christ 🙏 our heavenly father is alive and well and speaking through all of HIS blessed children. We love you father and patiently look forward to being with you in your Kingdom.

[@CaptMacedHawkins]

Why not speed up the process?

[@2030-investinheaven]

@@CaptMacedHawkins Not every soul is accounted for yet. They haven't heard the good news and believe on Christ. Born again. There is an unnatural lab bug been let loose on us for the first time ever vccns forced on us with hell knows what in it, half the world leaders are maniacs and the elites are saying with technology this generation will be the last to die or the first to live forever. CERN and Chinese CERN breaking through in to other dimensions. Tick tock captain is that why you're searching?

[@2030-investinheaven]

@@CaptMacedHawkins count yourself very lucky Sir

[@2030-investinheaven]

@@CaptMacedHawkins have I submitted a good case for the King of Kings, Sir?

[@Anton-fw2wb]

It demonstrates the existence of christians , not Jesus.

[@tombuddy100]

How would you explain existence of Christians in the 1st century, and Tacitus mentioning their origin being Judea, and Pilate? Wouldn't that be a strange coincidence that Christians mentioned in the New Testament have the same backstory?

[@Anton-fw2wb]

@@tombuddy100 Jesus was not a christian. Fact! I have a lot of doubt about Pilatus. It was not his job to judge for death penalty. Ordinary people like the followers of Jesus in that time was not literate, and did not have consideration for historical memory like we have today. Gospels were written 40/50 years after jesus' death. They did not know even their date of birth. I think they named Pilatus just for his notorious cruelty. If it was happened fifty years ago, you would say it was Hitler's. He really lived; he was cruel, but did not killed Jesus. See Josephus Falvius. Judea was an imperial province under the governor of Syria.

[@tombuddy100]

@@Anton-fw2wb So, how and where did Christianity originate according to you?

[@Anton-fw2wb]

@@tombuddy100 In the New Testament Christians are mentioned just three times and it was not in a respectuful way. San Paul call his new community in the name of Jesus the resurrected, "the path". We do not know the exact time when Christianity totally detached from its Jewish roots and was recognized by this name, but we could argue that it happened when it spread consistently to the Greco-roman people, around the time the Gospels were written from 70 e.v..

[@tombuddy100]

@@Anton-fw2wb So, do Gospels and Acts in the New Testament describe actual events or not?

[@jamessheridan4306]

Nothing new here. The writings of Tacitus have been known and studied for centuries. So?

[@GabrielMirandaLima-hv7oe]

I'm agnostic, but negating the historical Jesus is completely absurd

[@nicholaswheeler507]

But but... The Annals of history is anonymous and was written many years after the fact. ;)

[@TestifyApologetics]

Lol.

[@willstevens4289]

The video’s conclusion, ‘Tacitus teaches us a lot about Jesus’, is a wild exaggeration. All that Tacitus tells us that Jesus lived in Judaea, that he was executed, and roughly when this happened. Certainly, this is evidence that the extreme mythicists are probably wrong, but that’s all; Tacitus tells us nothing at all about Jesus’s life or actions or teachings.

[@Jin-dc7gl]

Tacitus was a Roman historian who wrote about the Roman Empire. He was not a Christian and certainly not a theologian. He wrote history from the perspective of a historian.

[@roddyboethius1722]

​@@Jin-dc7glhe wrote as a Roman royal who wanted to help his family create a new religion to destroy Judaism

[@doxholiday1372]

​@roddyboethius1722 So, to help create it he wrote a tiny blurb calling it evil, and accused its adherents of hating all mankind, and being hated for abominations? That doesn't make any sense.

[@doxholiday1372]

😅😅

[@doxholiday1372]

😅😅😅😊

[@crapton9002]

Hmmm, no mention of the Saints rising from the grave during the crucifixion? Matthew 27: 51-53. Crazy right?

[@mattsprenger6121]

Oh, I'm reading Tacitus' histories at the moment. Why did you not mention this from Tacitus cobber? "The hand was instantly restored to use, and the day again shone for the blind man. Both facts are told by eye-witnesses even now when falsehood brings no reward." Here's the full passage people. 81 1 During the months while Vespasian was waiting at Alexandria for the regular season of the summer winds and a settled sea,​ many marvels continued to mark the favour of heaven and a certain partiality of the gods toward him. One of the common people of Alexandria, well known for his loss of sight, threw himself before Vespasian's knees, praying him with groans to cure his blindness, being so directed by the god Serapis, whom this most superstitious of nations worships before all others; and he besought the emperor to deign to moisten his cheeks and eyes with his spittle. Another, whose hand was useless, prompted by the same god, begged Caesar to step and trample on it. Vespasian at first ridiculed these appeals and treated them with p161 scorn; then, when the men persisted, he began at one moment to fear the discredit of failure, at another to be inspired with hopes of success by the appeals of the suppliants and the flattery of his courtiers: finally, he directed the physicians to give their opinion as to whether such blindness and infirmity could be overcome by human aid. Their reply treated the two cases differently: they said that in the first the power of sight had not been completely eaten away and it would return if the obstacles were removed; in the other, the joints had slipped and become displaced, but they could be restored if a healing pressure were applied to them. Such perhaps was the wish of the gods, and it might be that the emperor had been chosen for this divine service; in any case, if a cure were obtained, the glory would be Caesar's, but in the event of failure, ridicule would fall only on the poor suppliants. So Vespasian, believing that his good fortune was capable of anything and that nothing was any longer incredible, with a smiling countenance, and amid intense excitement on the part of the bystanders, did as he was asked to do. The hand was instantly restored to use, and the day again shone for the blind man. Both facts are told by eye-witnesses even now when falsehood brings no reward. Oh yeah, sorry about that, it's Vespasian that Tacitus has wrtten about. I'd read this page people, there's a few interesting coincidences on this page. "...the vision said that this act would be a happy thing for the kingdom and that the city that received the god would be great and famous: after these words the youth seemed to be carried to heaven in a blaze of fire." Again it's Vespasian having the vision. Judaism has the same problem, their religion was given to, and defined by other ruling nations too. There is no proof matey, you may want to take those snoop dog glasses off about now.

[@robertcarney6112]

I’m a deconverted Christian > atheist, but always been deep in biblical scholarship. I really appreciate your videos, they’re refreshing to be so well done from the Christian view. Folks like Turek, William Lane Craig and the like are just 🙄🙄 I accept a historical Jesus, and some of Ehrman’s views. And while Tacitus and Josephus both wrote of Christ (Josephus most likely contains some Christian tampering, but nonetheless references Christ), they weren’t contemporaneous to the events that they’re writing about. That’s not to say the sources aren’t valuable, because they as historians can easily can utilize who/what is around them to construct a historical narrative. But those accounts and the Gospel narratives don’t seem reliable enough for me as history to verify the miracle claim of the resurrection. I left the faith for other reasons, particularly the Problem of Evil and pondering on why a tri-omni God would even create in the first place with the foreknowledge of the calamity of sin entering the world. Biblical inerrancy and textual critiques played a part as well… but mainly the Problem of Evil, or at Ehrman sometimes references, the additional Problem of Suffering. Tangents aside, love the videos! I’ve sent them to my Christian friends. Keep it up! ❤️

[@TestifyApologetics]

Thanks for the kind words and for sharing. Watch other videos, I argue for why the Gospel narratives can be trusted. If anything, I hope they can be at least some food for thought. Either way, keep seeking truth and I appreciate the comment.

[@robertcarney6112]

@@TestifyApologetics I’ve watched several of your videos. I’ll find your Gospel one next, and will detail my disagreements (if any) in the comments 😂😂

[@TestifyApologetics]

@@robertcarney6112 Sounds good, I might not have tons of time to respond but chances are I'll address something in future videos. I have a lot planned to address

[@shauntaylor7332]

Tacitus is writing decades after the death of Jesus and is simply relaying stories handed down. He never met Jesus or anyone who had known Jesus as they were long dead. Tacitus if genuine proves that people were following the Jesus story at the time of his writings but doesn't prove that he existed at all. Early Christian fathers who should have known of Tacitus's reference to Jesus are unfamiliar with it...nice try.

[@xxxs8309]

Then why don't you believe first hand accounts of people who met Jesus in the bible?

[@adjustedbrass7551]

​@@xxxs8309 ooooooooohhh

[@antonyjohnsonchittilapilly8498]

I had an atheist dismiss and laugh at me when I pointed out that Tacitus wrote on Jesus. His logic was that Tacitus was born in AD 56 and hence wouldn’t know about Christ. He said so on a post by William lane Craig on instagram and was a cowardly individual because he had disable responses for his comments. I laughed at his ignorance simply because his logic was akin to saying someone born after a historical figures existence cannot be an honest in their writings even though he might have access to records available to them at the time.

[@lauchlanguddy1004]

no, he is second hand, who met christ and wrote??

[@RyanHReviews]

I like this video, you did a good job of simply explaining and debunking. I advise against quoting Bart Ehrman for supporting what you say though. It implicitly gives the impression that he is an honest "expert". I hope you can see through his deception.

[@name_christian]

You should’ve talked more about Pliny the younger. Him and Tacitus were besties. It’s probable that Tacitus checked his facts with him. Guess what: Pliny never heard anything like it, struggles to remember any Christians at all although he was heavily involved in the administration (governor, consul). And the kicker: his dad, Pliny the elder was a temporary of the time when Rome was burning - not only did Pliny the elder not mention this spectacular story to his son, Christians in general were not even a topic. Strange.

[@TorahObservantUnitarian]

Thanks brother.

[@castaway123100]

Four secular historians chronicle Jesus. Pliny the Younger (nephew of Pliny the Elder whom died in Pompeii when Vesuvius erupted) , Tacitus, Joesepheus and Suteonian.

[@user-pr6jy9sc9b]

Unbelievable ! Not a single first hand fact in the whole post , just third hand hearsay .... Notice if anybody disagrees with the posters they are ' fringe ' ........mind-blowingly delusional