Tudo indica que o Fausto realmente ainda não compreendeu que não podemos usar relatos de cristãos como evidência da existência
de Jesus. Pois então vou lhe fazer um favor e mostrar o tipo de evidência que queremos que você apresente (que, note, é insuficiente):
Early non-Christian references to Jesus
For more details on this topic, see Historicity of Jesus#Greco-Roman sources.
Four early writers are typically cited in support of the actual existence of Jesus: Josephus, Tacitus, Suetonius, and Pliny the Younger.
* The Antiquities of Josephus (37 CE - c. 100 CE), written in 93 CE, contain two references to Jesus. The text comprising the first reference, the Testimonium Flavianum, states that Jesus was the founder of a sect, but the verse is believed to be shot through with language not written by the original author. Grammatical analysis indicates significant differences with the passages that come before and after it, while some phrases would be inconsistent with a non-Christian author like Josephus. This leads scholars to believe the Jesus reference was either altered or added by persons other than Josephus. The second reference states that in the year 62 CE, the newly appointed high priest "convened the judges of the Sanhedrin and brought them a man called James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ, and certain others. He accused them of having transgressed the law and delivered them up to be stoned."[161][163] John E. Remsburg argued that, based on successive lines, the Jesus talked about in this passage is not the Jesus of the Bible, but rather another man with the name of Jesus who also had a brother named James:[164]:
"Whereupon Albinus complied with what they said, and wrote in anger to Ananus, and threatened that he would bring him to punishment for what he had done; on which king Agrippa took the high priesthood from him, when he had ruled but three months, and made Jesus, the son of Damneus, high priest."[163]
* Tacitus (circa 117) in the context of the Great Fire of Rome refers to "some people, known as Christians, whose disgraceful activities were notorious". The originator of that name, Christus, had been executed when Tiberius was emperor by the order of Pontius Pilate. But this deadly cult, though checked for a time, was now breaking out again."[165] However it has been pointed out by experts on both sides there is no way to tell where Tacitus got the information for this passage and state there are hints in the passage that suggest that the information did not come from Roman records.[161][166] Recently, Oskar Augustsson has, in accordance with earlier scholarship, shown that the 'i' in Christianos (Christians) was actually changed from an e; "Accordingly, the scribe originally wrote about Chrestiani, Chrestians."[167]
* Suetonius, who wrote in the second century, made reference to unrest among the Jews of Rome under Claudius caused by "instigator Chrestus".[168] This has sometimes been identified with Jesus Christ, though in this case it must refer to indirect posthumous effects and gives no biographical information. Critics argue that "Chrestus" was in fact a very common Greek name and may have been a person of that name living under Claudius rather than a misspelling of Christ. Also it is pointed out that Suetonius refers to Jews not Christians in this passage, even though in his Life of Nero he shows some knowledge of the sect's existence, indicating that "Chrestus" was not "Christus".[citation needed]
* There are references to Christians in the letters of Pliny the Younger,[169] but they give no specific information about the founder of this movement.
The Babylonian Talmud contains several references to the name Yeshu that have been traditionally identified with Jesus of Nazareth. However, these same passages have been used to show that the biblical Jesus is based upon an earlier figure who lived about 100 BCE.[6][170] Furthermore, tradition has the Babylonian Talmud being compiled in the late third to early fourth century CE, limiting its value to determining events of the 1st century CE.
Some scholars doubt that these sources refute the Jesus-myth theory. Charles Guignebert, Professor of the History Of Christianity at the Sorbonne, who does believe that Jesus of the Gospels existed and lived in Galilee during the reign of the Emperor Tiberius, discounts the worth of all the non-Christian sources as proof of the existence of Jesus. Thus "all the pagan and Jewish testimonies, so-called, afford us no information of any value about the life of Jesus, nor even any assurance that he ever lived... [171]
Robert M. Price says that these pagan references, even if taken as genuine, merely amount to an account of what the ancient Christians of the time were saying about Jesus, not that the pagan writers were claiming Jesus as a contemporary.
[edit] Apparent omissions in early records
Many proponents of the Christ myth theory point out that there is a complete lack of non-Christian documents that make reference to Jesus before the end of the first century, and note the survival of writings by a number of Roman and Jewish commentators and historians who wrote in the first century but which lack mention of events described in the Gospels, taking this as evidence that Jesus was invented later. Opponents of the theory argue that arguments from silence are unreliable.[161]
Justus of Tiberias wrote at the end of the first century a history of Jewish kings, with whom the gospels state Jesus had interacted. Justus' history does not survive, but Photius, who read it in the 9th century, stated that it did not mention "the coming of Christ, the events of His life, or the miracles performed by Him."[172] The Jewish historian Philo, who lived in the first half of the 1st century also fails to mention Jesus, as do other major contemporary writers[173]
In response to Jesus myth proponents who argue the lack of early non-Christian sources, or question their authenticity, R. T. France counters that "even the great histories of Tacitus have survived in only two manuscripts, which together contain scarcely half of what he is believed to have written, the rest is lost" and that the life of Jesus, from a Roman point of view, was not a major event.[161]
R.T. France states that Christianity was actively opposed by both the Roman Empire and the Jewish authorities, and would have been utterly discredited if Jesus had been shown as a non-historical figure. He argues that there is evidence in Pliny, Josephus and other sources of the Roman and Jewish approaches at the time, and none of them involved this suggestion.[161]
[edit] Influenced by the Old Testament
Advocates of the Jesus-myth believe that the gospels are not history but a type of midrash: creative narratives based on the stories, prophecies, and quotes in the Hebrew Bible. Doherty has argued that when the midrashic elements are removed, little to no content remains that could be used to demonstrate the existence of a historical Jesus.[174][175]
A majority of scholars[176][177] explain the similarities between the Gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke using the two-source hypothesis, according to which, Matthew and Luke derived most of their content from Mark and from a lost collection of Jesus' sayings known as the Q document. In the small amount of additional material unique to Matthew, Jesus is presented with strong parallels to Old Testament figures, most noticeably Moses.[citation needed] Some[who?] argue that there is no reason to assume that the sayings attributed to a postulated Q document originated with Jesus.
Though believing that the gospels may contain some creativity and midrash, opponents of the Jesus-myth argue that the gospels are more akin to ancient Greco-Roman biographies.[citation needed] Such works attempted to impart historical information about historical figures but were not comprehensive and could include legendary developments.
fonte:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_myth#Earliest_recorded_referencesResumindo: as três citações mais antigas encontradas de autores não cristãos são de Flávio Josefo (93 DC), Tácito (117 DC) e Suetônio (século II). O detalhe é que dentre esses autores, o único que se refere diretamente a Jesus e não aos cristãos é Josefo, e os
especialistas concordam que se trata de uma fraude. Estes, meu caro, são os
fatos.
Lembre-se que os muçulmanos afirmam que Mohammad subiu aos céus em uma burrinha alada. Os mórmons afirmam que uma tribo de
hebreus colonizou a América do Norte. Os fiéis de Padre Cícero afirmam que ele transformou uma hóstia em sangue. Os xintoístas afirmavam que os deuses salvaram o Japão de uma invasão mongol (mandando um "vento divino" - em japonês "kamikaze") destruir seus navios. Mas o fato é que não temos a obrigação de acreditar apenas na palavra deles, da mesma forma que não temos a obrigação de acreditar na palavra de Mateus, Lucas, Marcos, João, Paulo e etc.[1]
[1] Lembro-lhe, embora você talvez já saiba disso, que mesmo os especialistas cristãos reconhecem que esses indivíduos provavelmente não foram os autores dos livros que lhes são atribuídos. No caso de Paulo, as análises indicam que boa parte das suas epístolas não foram escritas por ele.
