Comments by "" (@neutronalchemist3241) on "Is Jesus Historical? What Do The Romans Say About Him?" video.

  1. We have not historical accounts of Emperor Caligula written during his life. And he was an Emperor, not an obscure preacher in a backward angle of the Empire.
    1
  2.  @diablificaton666  I'm pretty sure word would gotten around if someone was Emperor. He would have said something, no?
    1
  3. Bethlehem existed since the bronze age. However only the Gospel of Luke states Jesus being born in Bethlehem.
    1
  4.  @romans883  The same proofs that the vast majority of archaeologist, that state bethlem existed since bronze age, have. I don't know how, from "However only the Gospel of Luke states Jesus being born in Bethlehem." you get "gospels are true". Mysteries of fanatics' mind I guess.
    1
  5. Consider that, writing of Christ's birth, Luke was writing of things happened before he was born. In the best case his gospel was written around 61AD. That means that there were probably no more direct witnesses of the 8BC census old enough to remember it, while there was still some witness of the 6AD one.
    1
  6. We have not historical accounts of Emperor Caligula written during his life. And he was an Emperor, not an obscure preacher in a backward angle of the Empire.
    1
  7. Actually all those elements in the religion of Mitra that are identical to the Christianism came from 2nd century sources, so it's difficult to say who copied who. The Nicene council only dealed with the problem of Christ being of the same substance of the fahter (Catholic belief) or of substance derived from that of the father (Arian belief). A secondary question debated was the precise calculation of the date of the Easter. No "pagan element" merged with christianity there. The Christian Canon was already complete at the beginning of 2nd century. Two centuries before the Nicene council (Muratorian canon).
    1
  8. No one that wrote about Pyrrhus of Epirus, or king Leonidas ever met them.
    1