Originally Posted by Deorum
Whether or not I believe they are true is irrelevant. The gospels don't claim to be written by eyewitnesses, nor do they claim to have been written at the time Jesus lived. What else ya got?
But you did not cite anything actually written by his enemies including unflattering details about him at the time of his existence (in fact, you did not cite anything at all). What would be an example of one of his enemies writing something defaming about him at the time?
*sigh*.... I'm being leveled I know but I'll play along cuz you owe me one.
Hostile Jewish Witnesses
He was said to be born of a virgin
(but he was actually fathered by a soldier)
That's unflattering. Jews claim that his mother was raped by a soldier and their was no virgin birth. Now this can't be taken as an eyewitness statement though...remember that the earliest record in the Talmud dates to 500AD and the earliest record in the Toledot Yeshu dates to 1000AD. It's also not 100% certain, and you know how much you like 100% certainty that the Yeshau (probably misspelled that) that they are referring to is actually Jesus of Nazareth but most historical scholars believe it is.
The more that even critical historians study the Bible, the more they are willing to admit the early dating of its authorship. No gospel in the Bible mentions the destruction of the temple in 70AD in Jerusalem (an event that would surely have been mentioned had it occurred prior to the writing of the Gospels), indicating that no gospel was authored later than 70AD. You don't deny the destruction of the temple, do you? Please say you accept this as historical fact. But when you look closely at Luke’s writing of the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts, we see that the Gospels are far earlier than that. Remember that Luke wrote these two books (later separated in our Bible) as one large document. We also know that the book of acts ends with Paul in captivity in Rome, prior to his execution which historians place at somewhere between 62-64AD. So we know that the Book of Acts is written before 62AD and that the Gospel of Luke is written sometime before that. Many conservative scholars date the Gospel at about 55-60AD. In addition, Biblical scholars and critics alike believe that Mark precedes the other Gospels, meaning that it has to be written prior to 55AD (much of Mark’s Gospel is mentioned in Luke’s account because he was a copy cat). So by dating in reverse in this manner, we can conclude that the Gospels ARE in fact eyewitness accounts (as they claim to be) that are written within 20-40 years of the life of Jesus!
Why would these authors lie or make up this story? All of them died horrible deaths and never changed their stories about this man they knew as Jesus:
Peter was crucified head down in Rome in 66AD
Andrew was bound to death in 74AD
James was beheaded in Jerusalem.
John was banished to the Isle of Patmos in 96AD
Phillip was crucified at Heirapole, Phryga in 52AD
Bartholomew was beaten, crucified, then beheaded in 52AD
Thomas was run through by a lance at Corehandal, East Indies in 52AD
Matthew was slain by the sword in the city of Ethiopia in about 60AD
James son of Alphaeus, was thrown from a pinnacle, then beaten to death in 60AD
Thaddeus was shot to death by arrows in 72AD
Simon was crucified in Persia in 74AD
These eyewitnesses had NO positive motive for their story. They gained no wealth, no comfortable lifestyle, and no assurance of a painless death. Witnesses without a positive motive other than truth are THE best witnesses in the world. CAN I GET AN AMEN ! !
And if you say “gotcha” … I will hunt you down.