jesus did exist, face it!

I am fed up with people denying jesus' existence, whether you are religous or not their are plenty of non religious sources from people that we KNOW exist, claiming the Jesus existed. Whether you believe in his teachings or not, is up to you.

reply to post by open mind


ok, show me the historical evidence to back up the existence of jesus.

www.probe.org...

this is just one of many. Type 'historic evidence of jesus christ' into google and check out the results. i am not trying to covert people, just proving his existance. i don't care whether you believe is his miracles, just as long as you know he existed

reply to post by open mind


i'll break down the "proof" provided

tacitus talks of "christus", not jesus, yeshu, or yeshua in palestine. "christus" is a title... that fits many who suffered under pilate in the time period

pliny the younger isn't a contemporaneous source, he's 80+ years removed from the time jesus was supposed to have lived...
and he only talks about CHRISTIANS... not a historical jesus

josephus is questionable at best, forgery at worst

the talmudic evidence is vague and doesn't refer to a specific time period in which the "yeshu" mentioned lived, nor does it tell us anything of his life

lucian only talks about what christians believe... not history.



[edit on 8/24/07 by madnessinmysoul]

good evidence outside the gospels doesn't really exist for christ, that link points to the best of them and as has been pointed out, they're not great.

this shouldn't be surprising, at his death the christian jews were fairly small in number and, at the end of the day, he was just a tradesman teaching an interpretation of the jewish faith without sanction. both romans and jews believed him to be a criminal. there is no reason to believe, in a time when books were hand written and the media didn't exist, that anybody outside of his followers would bother mentioning him. it would be strange if he were mentioned, it is entirely predictable that he wasn't.

First to the OP, while I personally am a Christian and do believe not only in the historical existence of Jesus, but of the salvation he brought, I don't understand why you think you can state to other people "Jesus existed - face it!" It's the same as the behavior of what I call "militant atheists" it's a demand that the opposing side of the argument agree with you. No one has to face anything concerning Jesus...not in this life anyway.

Concerning the hand-waving of the Josephus reference to Jesus. This is why there will never be proof of his existence. A contemporary noted his existence and it is declared to most likely have been "inserted by a pious scribe"....yeah, prove that statement. Prove that statement first and then we will strike Josephus's statement as evidence of Jesus. That's the required sequence of events...not the opposite. We don't declare a statement "doubtful" and set it aside as evidence of Jesus' existence, we accept it as evidence of Jesus' life until some one proves otherwise.

P.S. To summarize my stance here - I don't require anyone to believe Jesus existed. But I do require a logical progression of argument and evidence to the contrary. So go prove Josephus' recorded statement was not his own and come back and present it. But don't rote a statement that has no supporting data behind it and then expect people to just set Josephus' statement aside.

[edit on 8-24-2007 by Valhall]

I do not mean this in any rude or impersonal way, but to the OP, if you truly believe that Jesus existed, for whatever reasons you have, it's your opinion.

Why does it bother you if there is a group, regardless of how many, that says otherwise? There can be a group who claims that the color green is actually another terror cell of al-qaeda, and is not a real color.

With a thread title such as 'What I believe is right, face it!', it looks like you're living in fear that this 'Jesus didn't exist movement' will catch on.

Who cares what people believe? you believe what you want, but don't push it on anyone.

Besides, if you know Jesus existed, and if he really did, then he knows you believe in him. You have nothing to worry about

Oh, and while you're off proving Josephus didn't say what Josephus said, please also gather all the evidence to prove Peter didn't say what Peter said in all his epistles. Because according to my records, Peter hung out with Jesus, so I think we could call him a "contemporary".

So right now the case sets as:

Jesus lived:
* Josephus
* Peter
* Gospels
* Tacitus

The burden of proof is to invalidate as authentic each of these accounts of Jesus' existence. Until then, it appears we've got quite a bit of documentation. Just to drill this point home, during the seige of Jerusalem 1,000,000 Jews died - and there were still some left when it all ended. So of those 1,000,000+ Josephus only bothered to mention less than a handful of individuals who were not religious (as in organized religion of that day), political or military leaders. Of those "plain old Jews" he did mention, two of them, Jesus and James the Just, had a connection. That's an interesting percent wouldn't you say?

[edit on 8-24-2007 by Valhall]

Valhall, all the "sources" don't even mention him by name... they mention a title that could be bestowed upon many who considered themselves to be the jewish messiah. the gospels... well, they are a bit self contradictory on a few points of his life (last words, death of judas)... and all are written after the fact... well after the fact.

Originally posted by pieman
good evidence outside the gospels doesn't really exist for christ, that link points to the best of them and as has been pointed out, they're not great.

good evidence within the gospels doesn't really exist either....

this shouldn't be surprising, at his death the christian jews were fairly small in number and, at the end of the day, he was just a tradesman teaching an interpretation of the jewish faith without sanction. both romans and jews believed him to be a criminal. there is no reason to believe, in a time when books were hand written and the media didn't exist, that anybody outside of his followers would bother mentioning him. it would be strange if he were mentioned, it is entirely predictable that he wasn't.

you don't think anybody would've written about his trial? nobody wrote about the ruckus he caused in the temple? his triumphant entry into jerusalem wasn't anything anyone would write about?
and why didn't his followers write anything about him until a few decades after he died?

listen, i'm not saying "jesus didn't exist" i'm saying that there is almost no evidence to back up the historicity of jesus.

One way you might verify some historical aspect is to look at other figures from history, especially that time period that are referenced only in a few sources. History really is to an extent a Consensus Reality and I dont think any of us are on the same page. So some people believe in anything and others believe in nothing. My clue to you is John the Baptist. See what you can find. Happy Hunting.

At the time of Jesus' death, he was not that well known of a guy. The local butcher probably had a larger following and more headlines in the local gossip.

This is were hard proof is hard to find. But were talking about a religious thing and this is based on faith. No hard proof needed, you just believe it. Everyone has an opinion on this issue. People who basically agree are members of their own religious beliefs named for the appropriate religious following. Be it Christian, catholic, Islam, Hindu, or even Buddhism.

Now if a guy could come up with a signed, rookie religion card, there you are!

Originally posted by hinky
At the time of Jesus' death, he was not that well known of a guy. The local butcher probably had a larger following and more headlines in the local gossip.

according to the gospels he had hundreds, if not thousands, of followers. that means he had quite a bit more of a following than the local butcher...
now, if what the gospels says about jesus is correct (which i highly doubt) he also appeared to hundreds of people after he died...

Hi

The website you give as proof is biased.

Just face it you will never know if it was fiction or real.

I was baptized and all of that but I will never put my faith in something I can´t see.

You should check out Zeitgeist not everything is true in that docu but you will get a good general idea.

IS-RA-EL
Isis-RA-EL

So much predates the bible it´s just not smart to believe it literatly.
Do you believe the earth is not older then 5000+ years and it was really made in 7 days?

Use the bible for personal enlightment and knowledge and after read other holy books.

Nando out!

What is Probe?
Probe Ministries is a non-profit ministry whose mission is to assist the church in renewing the minds of believers with a Christian worldview and to equip the church to engage the world for Christ. Probe fulfills this mission through our Mind Games conferences for youth and adults, our 3 1/2 minute daily radio program, and our extensive Web site at www.probe.org.

Nando out!

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
Valhall, all the "sources" don't even mention him by name... they mention a title that could be bestowed upon many who considered themselves to be the jewish messiah. the gospels... well, they are a bit self contradictory on a few points of his life (last words, death of judas)... and all are written after the fact... well after the fact.

I'm sorry, was this your proof? Looks like a tenuous assumption to me.

Originally posted by hinky
At the time of Jesus' death, he was not that well known of a guy. The local butcher probably had a larger following and more headlines in the local gossip.

What was that butcher's name? And what books were written about him? I must have missed that collection.

You guys' bias is showing and so is your desperation. I can't figure why its so important to you. Think about it - your grasping straws for some reason to cast doubt on the existence of one man....hmmm. Not many other men in history people spend this much energy on to try to muddy whether they existed or not.

Granted there are references to Christians, and to their Christ scattered through out ancient writings... HOWEVER they do not de facto prove the existence of Jesus, rather the existence of a cult centered around him.

Also many of the so-called references to Jesus in for example Joesphus are widely considered to be later insertions by monks who were copying the texts and have no historical validity whatsoever.

Also as for the accuracy of the new testament... its very first assertions about a poll tax and the need for Joseph and his family to Bethleham to take part in it has been proven false. There are no verifying Roman imperial or provincial records for such a poll during that time frame, not to mention, the Romans did not require you to return to your home town to be counted, they punched your nose wherever you were.

Also there are no records whatsoever of a slaughter of the innocents ordered by Herod and these people were meticulious record keepers.

I highly recommend Robin Lane Foxes "Unauthorized Version: Truth and Fiction in the Bible" he is a first rate classical scholar. It is a kind of companion volume (in my mind anyway plus it came out later) to him masterpiece "Pagans and Christians: Religion and the Religious Life from the Second Century to the Fourth and the Rise of Constintine"

Amazing works both of them, well written and miticliously researched and not fluff but serious scholarship.

Originally posted by Valhall

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
Valhall, all the "sources" don't even mention him by name... they mention a title that could be bestowed upon many who considered themselves to be the jewish messiah. the gospels... well, they are a bit self contradictory on a few points of his life (last words, death of judas)... and all are written after the fact... well after the fact.

I'm sorry, was this your proof? Looks like a tenuous assumption to me.

my proof: nobody names him. they use the title. many claimed to be the messiah at the same time jesus existed (they were, oddly enough, recorded at the time...)
the proof is in your biased source. the inconsistencies in the gospels? they're right there for you to see.

You guys' bias is showing and so is your desperation. I can't figure why its so important to you. Think about it - your grasping straws for some reason to cast doubt on the existence of one man....hmmm. Not many other men in history people spend this much energy on to try to muddy whether they existed or not.

this matters because the only reason the claim "jesus was real as a person" is accepted is because of the religions that claim it. and people do try to look at whether or not people existed... there was inquiry into whether or not socrates existed, people doubt that homer was a real guy...

"Historia docuit quantum nos iuvasse illa de Christo fabula"
(Pope Leone X, letter to Cardinal Bembo)


I don't want translate because i don't want annoy anyone sensibility. Anyway that sentence synthesizes the thought of the high prelacy.
If you want know more about this f..le, search for Horus and his family.

Ciao,

Andala

P.S.

This f..le will survive thousands of years thanks to its moral principles.

To my nollage there were other men who were thought to be messiah and had followers. And they also made "miracles".

And what about hese theories?
www.vexen.co.uk...
As believable as any other theory. A book written and ALSO cencored about 2000 yrs ago isnt a good founding stone for a religion. Its just you really have to believe in something. Religion isnt thinking mans game.
I just watched this Gods warriors episode from CNN. It was about christians. Oh man it was again and again proved to me that religious people are so close to being in asylum with other grazy people.

reply to post by Andala


Excatly Andala!

Straight from the horses mouth.

nando out!

Then there is the theory that Jesus was actually a conglomeration of several people (the Apostles) going out and doing miracles and such under that name. Not sure about the specifics of theory, but interesting nonetheless.