[pm_titel]

What Are We Looking For?

Watter soort historiese stawing van die Christelike boodskap moet ons verwag om uit te vind van nie-Christelike bronne?

We are not likely to find them claiming that Jesus was the Messiah, of dat hy uit die dood opgestaan. This may sound obvious: but it is amazing how many times one hears otherwise intelligent people suggest that these things should not be believed, because the only people who say so are Christians!

Die Christelike geloof was ernstig in stryd met aanvaarde oortuigings in Joodse, Romeinse en Griekse samelewing. The Jews claimed that Jesus worked his miracles through sorcery (c.f. Luke 11:14-5). The Romans regarded Christians as ‘atheists’, because they rejected their gods and the divinity of the Emperor. gevolglik, we should expect such references as do exist in non-Christian sources to be disparaging. As we shall see later in the case of the Testimonium Flavianum, any that isn’t must be treated with caution.

The Scarcity of Secular Sources.

Ongelukkig, we cannot expect to find much contemporary secular corroboration of the New Testament at all, as very few secular documents from this period have survived to the present day. In werklikheid, there are so few that we can provide a fairly exhaustive listing of them in just a few lines:

• Philo, who lived in Egypt and died in 40 AD, concentrated on philosophy and the relationship between Jewish and Greek culture.
• There is part of a history of Rome by Velleius Paterculus, dated 30 AD.
• There is an inscription from Caesaraea containing two thirds of Pilate’s name, gedateer tussen 30 en 40 AD.
• There are some fables written by Phaedrus dated 40-50 AD.
• From the 50’s and 60’s there are only a handful of items, much of it written by Spanish emigrants living in Rome.

Apart from these there are:

• A poem of Lucan, Seneca’s nephew, on the war between Julius Caesar and Pompey.
• A book on agriculture by Columella.
• Fragments of the novel ‘Satyricon’, by Gaius Petronicus.
• A few hundred lines from the satirist, Persius.
• ‘Historia Naturalis,’ (natural history) by the Elder Pliny.
• Fragments of a commentary on Cicero by Asconius Pedianus.
• A history of Alexander the Great by Quintus Curtius.
• Various writings of Seneca.

Of these, only two might have written anything, Philo and Seneca.

• Philo was a resident of Alexandria in Egypt; but would probably have heard of Jesus and his followers. He himself was a practising Jew, and his interest is in things Jewish. He writes at some length about the teachings of the Essenes. But to many Jews of his time (including St Paul, prior to his conversion!) the Nazarenes were a heretical sect; and he may well have ignored them for this reason.
• Seneca would also have been a possibility: but Christianity was only just gaining its first foothold in Rome during the late 50’s and early 60’s; and did not rise to prominence until Nero’s persecution in 64 AD. Seneca was in deep trouble with Nero himself (he committed suicide in 65 AD); so is unlikely to have courted further problems by touching on such a sensitive subject, especially if he had any sympathy for Christians.

Ander bronne bestaan ​​het nie, such as Thallus and Phlegon, want hulle word genoem in geskrifte van die vroeë Kerkvaders, maar is sedertdien verloor. These will be discussed in due course, saam met 'n paar ander later verwysings van sekulêre en Joodse bronne.

En wat van Justus van Tiberias?

As gevolg daarvan, ons gedwing word om te vertrou op sekulêre bronne van 'n effens later datum.

Hoe Gerieflik!

Maar, although there are not many really early external corroborations of the historicity of Jesus, diegene wat wel bestaan ​​is van presies die soort en geskatte getal wat hier verwag. Tacitus and Josephus, byvoorbeeld, provide just the kind of evidence we would expect. Although not the only sources they are amongst the best, aangesien beide goed bevestig en het 'n reputasie as versigtig navorsers.

Terug na die hoof artikel.