Was Apollonius of Tyana the Historical Jesus?

[andrasnm]

• Edited by a Moderator •

It is my firm understanding that the Historical Jesus figure who actually had peer references from independent sources live 100 years prior. (Talmudic references know of a sorcerer who was stoned to death (not crucified).

...and I quote myself "This is an interesting controversy. It allowed me some time to examine the historical facts of the existence of these men, their accomplishments and their legacies. Clearly Jesus wins over Apollonius in name recognition if that was the ultimate goal.

Historians argue whether Apollonius was born in the same timeline as Jesus (some placing Apollonius birth date to the proximity of Joshua of Nazareth (later known to be Jesus).
It is obvious that we have a task here to show;
1) Jesus of Nazareth actually existed as a historical figure,
2) And also show that he was or was not actually the same person as historian refereed as Apollonius of Tyana.

So what is the truth? Ultimate facts and proof will not be forthcoming as with any ancient texts there will be a room for debate, question and interpretations of texts.

The problem is that historians without any faith based bias will have to reject any mentions of the gospels which are not written by contemporaries but disciples.
Here we have the “evidence” of Paul, whose letters start ~ 50 CE+. Paul not only never met Jesus, but makes the following statement in Galatians: [11] “For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not man’s gospel. [12] For I did not receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through a revelation of Jesus Christ. “ Isn’t this a hint coming from Paul that all the talk of Jesus was a talk about the principle, not a real man?"

[andrasnm]

there are a lot of theories, however historical facts are historical facts. The way the experts view documents is very uniform and distinct. It is alleged that virtually no document can be used from the bible as they are not contemporary and historical references. So what is left? The talmud? Essene writings?

[papas]

here is the full blog

It is my firm understanding that the Historical Jesus figure who actually had peer references from independent sources live 100 years prior. (Talmudic references know of a sorcerer who was stoned to death (not crucified).

?? The Talmud is easily demonstratable as filled with legends and embellishments when it comes to miracles, having been written 150-200 years after some of the people it describes lived. A clear example is with the death of Honi the circle-maker, which Josephus attributes to a stoning after his refusal to pray for the military victory of his captors, whereas the Talmud puts it as him having fallen in a deep sleep for 70 years, awaking and after no one believed he was Honi, to have prayed for God to take him.

Here we have the “evidence” of Paul, whose letters start ~ 50 CE+. Paul not only never met Jesus, but makes the following statement in Galatians: [11] “For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not man’s gospel. [12] For I did not receive it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through a revelation of Jesus Christ. “ Isn’t this a hint coming from Paul that all the talk of Jesus was a talk about the principle, not a real man?"

No it isn't.

[shunyadragon]

?? The Talmud is easily demonstratable as filled with legends and embellishments when it comes to miracles, having been written 150-200 years after some of the people it describes lived.

Sounds like the description of the Bible.

A clear example is with the death of Honi the circle-maker, which Josephus attributes to a stoning after his refusal to pray for the military victory of his captors, whereas the Talmud puts it as him having fallen in a deep sleep for 70 years, awaking and after no one believed he was Honi, to have prayed for God to take him.

I agree that Apollonius of Tyana was not the historical Jesus.