The Evidence For Jesus' Existence Is Nothing But Hearsay

I could have maybe taken you seriously if you did proper research and ALSO looked at proof of Him having existed and compared. All you have done, in honesty, is quote. That's easy! However, I'll make a few comments:

Originally posted by AlexG141989

There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus.

Why do you think that is? Why no roman records of Jesus or OTHER crucified criminals? In fact, why are there no records of almost anything from that time? Here's a clue - Nero, Fire, 64AD.

Have you researched the shroud of Turin? Yeah painting etc or whatever folk want it to be in their minds - a scientific study proved it has the expected markings of a man who suffered a torturous death and is consistent with the recordings of the bible - AND THAT from a Jew who had nothing to gain by affirming it's authenticity.

All documents about Jesus got written well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings.

When you say "Well after..." how many years is that? Would 50 years be enough to forget about some like that? I don't think so!!

Flavius Josephus (A.D. 37-100) wrote a monumental history, Antiquities of the Jews, in which he referred to Jesus twice. In section 18.3.3 he called Jesus "the Christ" and wrote of His "marvelous deeds." In section 20.9.1 he referred to the trial of James and identified him as the "the brother of Jesus, the so-called Christ."
Pliny the Younger, governor of Bithynia (in northern Turkey), wrote a letter (Epistle X.96) to Roman Emperor Trajan (c. A.D. 112) seeking counsel on how to deal with Christians whose practice it was to meet on appointed days to sing a hymn "to Christ as if to God."
Cornelius Tacitus was a Roman historian who, in his Annals (XV.44, c. A.D. 115), wrote of "Christus" (from Christos, Greek for "Christ") who "was executed at the hands of the procurator Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius."
Suetonius, the popular Roman writer, about A.D. 120 described how the Emperor Claudius commanded the Jews to depart from Rome for "continually making disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus" (Vita Claudii XXV.4). "Chrestus" is again a corrupted form of Christos (Christ). Luke made reference to this situation in Rome in Acts 18:2.
During the later part of the second through the fifth centuries, many more historical references to Jesus were made in Jewish rabbinical literature, especially the Talmud. Several prominent pagan philosophers—Celsus, Lucian of Samosata and Porphyry of Tyre—wrote attacks on Jesus, His teachings and followers. Early Christian writers and church leaders—Polycarp (c. A.D. 69-155), Irenaeus (A.D. 130-200) and others—wrote extensively about Jesus Christ as well.

(Shortened)None of these other people, mind you, ever show up in court, nor can anyone find them.

Again, see Nero, Fire, 64AD - so it would be true to say IF all records were destroyed that would confirm the existence of Jesus would this records also have confirmed the existence of "witnesses"? Simply - YES!

None of the historians...

Historian(s) from which time period?

...about Jesus give reliable sources to eyewitnesses, therefore all we have remains as hearsay.

Elaine Pagels writes

shortened)Where it was written and by whom we do not know; the work is anonymous, although tradition attributes it to Mark..."

She also needs to do some research - and why? Because... Archaeology contributed to what we know Christ and history around him via excavations on Temple Mount in Jerusalem and Israel in general; including Greece, Rome and Turkey. These excavations confirmed the Bible's accuracy in terms of history.

I won't go on. BUT, you do get the point? Unless you have already made up your mind you might agree it is possible that Jesus DID exist!

I could have maybe taken you seriously if you did proper research and ALSO looked at proof of Him having existed and compared. All you have done, in honesty, is quote. That's easy! However, I'll make a few comments:

Originally posted by AlexG141989

There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus.

Why do you think that is? Why no roman records of Jesus or OTHER crucified criminals? In fact, why are there no records of almost anything from that time? Here's a clue - Nero, Fire, 64AD.
Have you researched the shroud of Turin? Yeah painting etc or whatever folk want it to be in their minds - a scientific study proved it has the expected markings of a man who suffered a torturous death and is consistent with the recordings of the bible - AND THAT from a Jew who had nothing to gain by affirming it's authenticity.

All documents about Jesus got written well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings.

When you say "Well after..." how many years is that? Would 50 years be enough to forget about some like that? I don't think so!!

Flavius Josephus (A.D. 37-100) wrote a monumental history, Antiquities of the Jews, in which he referred to Jesus twice. In section 18.3.3 he called Jesus "the Christ" and wrote of His "marvelous deeds." In section 20.9.1 he referred to the trial of James and identified him as the "the brother of Jesus, the so-called Christ."
Pliny the Younger, governor of Bithynia (in northern Turkey), wrote a letter (Epistle X.96) to Roman Emperor Trajan (c. A.D. 112) seeking counsel on how to deal with Christians whose practice it was to meet on appointed days to sing a hymn "to Christ as if to God."
Cornelius Tacitus was a Roman historian who, in his Annals (XV.44, c. A.D. 115), wrote of "Christus" (from Christos, Greek for "Christ") who "was executed at the hands of the procurator Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius."
Suetonius, the popular Roman writer, about A.D. 120 described how the Emperor Claudius commanded the Jews to depart from Rome for "continually making disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus" (Vita Claudii XXV.4). "Chrestus" is again a corrupted form of Christos (Christ). Luke made reference to this situation in Rome in Acts 18:2.
During the later part of the second through the fifth centuries, many more historical references to Jesus were made in Jewish rabbinical literature, especially the Talmud. Several prominent pagan philosophers—Celsus, Lucian of Samosata and Porphyry of Tyre—wrote attacks on Jesus, His teachings and followers. Early Christian writers and church leaders—Polycarp (c. A.D. 69-155), Irenaeus (A.D. 130-200) and others—wrote extensively about Jesus Christ as well.

(Shortened)None of these other people, mind you, ever show up in court, nor can anyone find them.

Again, see Nero, Fire, 64AD - so it would be true to say IF all records were destroyed that would confirm the existence of Jesus would this records also have confirmed the existence of "witnesses"? Simply - YES!

None of the historians...

Historian(s) from which time period?

...about Jesus give reliable sources to eyewitnesses, therefore all we have remains as hearsay.

See notes above.

Elaine Pagels writes (shortened)Where it was written and by whom we do not know; the work is anonymous, although tradition attributes it to Mark..."

She also needs to do some research - and why? Because... Archaeology contributed to what we know Christ and history around him via excavations on Temple Mount in Jerusalem and Israel in general; including Greece, Rome and Turkey. These excavations confirmed the Bible's accuracy in terms of history.
I won't go on. BUT, you do get the point? Unless you have already made up your mind you might agree it is possible that Jesus DID exist!

Something else i need to bring up as a last note. Where did AD go? OF course!! Everyone just decided to use AD - right?? Even Jews, Atheists etc cos some dude said it would be cool. OR, do you perhaps think it had to do with Christ? So we still use it today. Must be proof of something huh?

[edit on 11/9/2008 by shearder]

MODS:

I placed this message and then the site went down for maintenance. It came up and was posted as Anonymous. Please delete the Anon posting about my initial post. Thanks.

reply to post by Heike


OK back from the dead (page 5) to accept your challenge!!!

Not what you were expecting though.

1. Healing the sick (the stone has been known for this, it was said to be a cure for the plague when there was no other, also it is the cure for the second death as referenced in revelation).
2 Walking on water (you need to understand that the stone is the spirit of almighty that hovers over the surface of the waters in Genesis).
3. Water into wine (Read the Golden Calf story gen 32, duet 9 etc) To make wine from water is easy, you just need to add manna to water).
4. Restoring sight to the blind (this is where every prophet has failed and what im trying to do here).

Hebrews 12:29 For our God is a consuming fire!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Happy birthday Jesus (white stone, manna, gold resin, alpha, golden calf, bread of life).

Feed your KA.

(Just a quick message from a different son of man)

So, who cares if he really existed? It's the message that matters, not the man. The message was that we ALL have access to God, not just people who practice certain beliefs and rituals. He didn't want to be served or worshiped or he WOULD have left evidence behind. None of that mattered to him. He just wanted people to stop being controlled by abusive religions. "Christians" have destroyed the message he was trying to teach by worshiping the man who brought the message.

My question is,"Why would people want to invent this Jesus person?"
What was the point???
I am not religious but interested.

Was there a vested interest in inventing him? What did anyone have to gain? I'd like to learn about these last two questions.

The Boy

It is not true that ALL evidence is hearsay ! For example, there is the OFFICIAL report from Pontius Pilate to the Emperor in which he gives many details about Jesus and the events surrounding the Crucifixion-----This amounts to an affidavit, attesting to the historicity of Jesus ! It was found in the Ante Nicene collection housed at the Vatican for all these years ! Does anyone seriously think that Pilate would LIE to Caesar ??

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
It is not true that ALL evidence is hearsay ! For example, there is the OFFICIAL report from Pontius Pilate to the Emperor in which he gives many details about Jesus and the events surrounding the Crucifixion-----This amounts to an affidavit, attesting to the historicity of Jesus ! It was found in the Ante Nicene collection housed at the Vatican for all these years ! Does anyone seriously think that Pilate would LIE to Caesar ??

Can you please post this evidence and sources in relation to pilate, if there is an official report please share it with the rest of us or it remains
HEARSAY

Hiya,

Originally posted by shearder
Why do you think that is? Why no roman records of Jesus or OTHER crucified criminals? In fact, why are there no records of almost anything from that time? Here's a clue - Nero, Fire, 64AD.

Rubbish.
How does a fire in ROME stop people from ELSEWHERE from writing?
How silly.
We DO have writings from this time which COULD have mentioned Jesus - such as Philo.

Originally posted by shearder
Have you researched the shroud of Turin? Yeah painting etc or whatever folk want it to be in their minds - a scientific study proved it has the expected markings of a man who suffered a torturous death and is consistent with the recordings of the bible - AND THAT from a Jew who had nothing to gain by affirming it's authenticity.

WTF?
The Shroud has been conclusively shown to be a forgery.
Are you still pretending otherwise?

Originally posted by shearder
When you say "Well after..." how many years is that? Would 50 years be enough to forget about some like that? I don't think so!!

What?
The argument not NOT that people FORGOT about Jesus - but that he didn't exist in the forst place. Did you actually READ any of this thread?

Originally posted by shearder
Flavius Josephus (A.D. 37-100) wrote a monumental history, Antiquities of the Jews, in which he referred to Jesus twice. In section 18.3.3 he called Jesus "the Christ" and wrote of His "marvelous deeds." In section 20.9.1 he referred to the trial of James and identified him as the "the brother of Jesus, the so-called Christ."

JOSEPHUS (c.96CE)

The famous Testamonium Flavianum (the T.F.) in the Antiquities of the Jews is considered probably the best evidence for Jesus, yet it has some serious problems :
* the T.F. as it stands uses clearly Christian phrases and names Christ as Messiah, it could not possibly have been written by the devout Jew Josephus (who remained a Jew and refused to call anyone "messiah" in his book which was partly about how false messiahs kept leading Israel astray.),
* The T.F. was not mentioned by any of the early Church fathers who reviewed Josephus.
* Origen even says Josephus does NOT call Jesus the Messiah, showing the passage was not present c.200CE.
* The T.F. first showed up in manuscripts of Eusebius, and was still absent from some manuscripts as late as 8th century.
* The other tiny passage in Josephus refers to Jesus, son of Damneus. The phrase "so-called Christ" may have been a later addition by a Christian who also mis-understood which Jesus was refered to.

An analysis of Josephus can be found here:
www.humanists.net...

In short - this passage is possibly a total forgery (or at best a corrupt form of a lost original.)
But, yes,
it COULD just be actual evidence for Jesus - late, corrupt, controversial but just POSSIBLY real historical evidence.

Originally posted by shearder
Pliny the Younger, governor of Bithynia (in northern Turkey), wrote a letter (Epistle X.96) to Roman Emperor Trajan (c. A.D. 112) seeking counsel on how to deal with Christians whose practice it was to meet on appointed days to sing a hymn "to Christ as if to God."

PLINY the Younger (c.112CE)

About 80 years after the alleged events, (and over 40 years after the war) Pliny referred to Christians who worshipped a "Christ" as a god, but there is no reference to a historical Jesus or Gospel events.
So,
Pliny is not evidence for a historical Jesus of Nazareth,
just evidence for 2nd century Christians who worshipped a Christ.
www.earlychristianwritings.com...

Originally posted by shearder
Cornelius Tacitus was a Roman historian who, in his Annals (XV.44, c. A.D. 115), wrote of "Christus" (from Christos, Greek for "Christ") who "was executed at the hands of the procurator Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius."

TACITUS (c.112CE)

Roughly 80 years after the alleged events (and 40 years after the war) Tacitus allegedly wrote a (now) famous passage about "Christ" - this passage has several problems however:
* Tacitus uses the term "procurator", used in his later times, but not correct for the actual period, when "prefect" was used.
* Tacitus names the person as "Christ", when Roman records could not possibly have used this name (it would have been "Jesus, son of Joseph" or similar.)
* This passage is paraphrased by Sulpicius Severus in the 5th century without attributing it to Tacitus, and may have been inserted back into Tacitus from this work.

This evidence speaks AGAINST it being based on any Roman records -
but
merely a few details which Tacitus gathered from Christian stories circulating in his time (c.f. Pliny.)
So,
this passage is NOT evidence for Jesus,
it's just evidence for 2nd century Christian stories about Jesus.

Originally posted by shearder
Suetonius, the popular Roman writer, about A.D. 120 described how the Emperor Claudius commanded the Jews to depart from Rome for "continually making disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus" (Vita Claudii XXV.4). "Chrestus" is again a corrupted form of Christos (Christ).

SUETONIUS (c.115CE)

Roughly 80-90 years after the alleged Gospel events, (about 75 years after the war) Suetonius refers to a "Chrestus" who stirred the Jews to trouble in Rome during Claudius' time, but:
* this "Chrestus" is a Greek name (from "useful"), and is also a mystic name for an initiate, it is not the same as "Christos"
* this Chrestus was apparently active in Rome, Jesus never was.
So,
this passage is not evidence for Jesus,
it's nothing to do with Jesus,
it's evidence for Christians grasping at straws.
www.earlychristianwritings.com...


In short -
none of these alleged "evidences" stand up to scrutiny.


Iasion

Hiya,

Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
It is not true that ALL evidence is hearsay ! For example, there is the OFFICIAL report from Pontius Pilate to the Emperor in which he gives many details about Jesus and the events surrounding the Crucifixion-----This amounts to an affidavit, attesting to the historicity of Jesus ! It was found in the Ante Nicene collection housed at the Vatican for all these years ! Does anyone seriously think that Pilate would LIE to Caesar ??

Wake up, Jeff !

This is a KNOWN FORGERY.

Another person who doesn't bother to check the facts first.


Iasion

reply to post by Iasion


Iasion, What's up?

First of all, appreciate your thoughts...

OT got a question for you....What are you going to do when you meet a kind, loving, REAL follower of Jesus...who meets your need or maybe that of your family....??

Prediction!


Your stalwart stance NOW will change...and you'll look back on the record of these posts and say...." man, I was sure foolish, back in the day!"

Thoughts?

OT

[edit on 11-9-2008 by OldThinker]

Originally posted by OldThinker
Iasion, What's up?
First of all, appreciate your thoughts...

Hey there :-)

Originally posted by OldThinker
OT got a question for you....What are you going to do when you meet a kind, loving, REAL follower of Jesus...who meets your need or maybe that of your family....??

A good question.
But actually, I've been through the religious phase - even made it to sub-deacon.

And I HAVE "met a kind, loving, REAL follower(s) of Jesus".
And of Buddha, Mohamed, Krishna...

I actually have no trouble with such people - anyone who is both a decent person, and is religious is fine with me.

Note I don't argue against religion in general.
Just against the false belief in a historical Jesus.

I myself, DO believe in God.
I myself, DO believe in Christ.

Just not in a historical Jesus.

Originally posted by OldThinker
Prediction!
Your stalwart stance NOW will change...and you'll look back on the record of these posts and say...." man, I was sure foolish, back in the day!"
Thoughts?
OT

[edit on 11-9-2008 by OldThinker]

Can't really agree :-)

I am already happy to be close to a religious person - I've been there, and I've been one.

If religion can help to make a person loving and kind - great :-)
But when it makes people force their false religious beliefs on others - I see red.

After years of religion and study and experience, I now have a bee in my bonnet about Jesus - I think he's a spiritual entity of the higher planes, but not a historical person.


Iasion

If you go back 500 years how much evidence is there to prove that your ancestors existed?

In my case, my ancestors that I can link to didn't have much wealth and/or status. I don't have anything that they produced. I don't have any writings about them.

But, I'm pretty sure that they existed.

^ Indeed, many consider him one of the ascended masters, along with Buddha, Mohammed, and a few others. It's funny how all the common ascended masters are male. Does anyone know of great female prophets, of any kind?

Is Mother Lakshmi a known ascended master...or is she just another representation used in the Hindu religion? From my research, she seems to be similar to Venus...another Goddess of beauty and luck. No real basis there huh.

[edit on 11-9-2008 by sdrawkcabII]

Hiya,

Originally posted by shearder
Something else i need to bring up as a last note. Where did AD go? OF course!! Everyone just decided to use AD - right?? Even Jews, Atheists etc cos some dude said it would be cool. OR, do you perhaps think it had to do with Christ? So we still use it today. Must be proof of something huh?

[edit on 11/9/2008 by shearder]

Yup, proof of something.
Proof of the gross ignorance of most apologists.

We name our months after Gods - e.g. June.
Does that prove the Goddess Juno exists, shearder?

We name our days after Gods - e.g. Thursday.
Does that prove the God Thor exists, shearder?


Hmm?


Iasion

When it comes to existence of "God," I would recommend that anyone religious or not, to read a book called "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins. He proves through science, and biology that there couldn't be a supernatural god.

Originally posted by torturekiller2006
When it comes to existence of "God," I would recommend that anyone religious or not, to read a book called "The God Delusion" by Richard Dawkins. He proves through science, and biology that there couldn't be a supernatural god.

...proves?

...thru science?

...and biology...?

OOcchh!!


That's a bit definitive, isn't it?

Science-you mean the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics?

Biology-you mean we came from ooze? Gonna make some good garden fertilizer?

OT confused here? Help me out here?

reply to post by Iasion



Iasion, have you read The Bible Unearthed by Israel Finkelstein (Professor of Archaeology at Tel Aviv University) and Neil Silberman (Director of the Ename Centre for Public Archaeology and Heritage Presentation)?

If you have, what did you think of it?

Originally posted by Iasion
How does a fire in ROME stop people from ELSEWHERE from writing?

Like where elsewhere? Northpole?

WTF?
The Shroud has been conclusively shown to be a forgery.
Are you still pretending otherwise?

Why should i pretend? How was it proven, conclusively, to be a fraud?

What?
The argument not NOT that people FORGOT about Jesus - but that he didn't exist in the forst place. Did you actually READ any of this thread?

Yeah, and i am pretty good at that - trust me. Ok let me approach this from a different angle; let's consider that the bible had 60 odd authors. Those that did write about Jesus were all smoking something? Those that did NOT meet him based writings on what was passed down to them - word of mouth. Think that is possible? So all the people that passed this information down were all deluded? If writings originated in 1950 then i can understand. BUT reference was made, to prove his existence, not too long after his death. See where i am?

JOSEPHUS (c.96CE)

The famous Testamonium Flavianum (the T.F.) in the Antiquities of the Jews is considered probably the best evidence for Jesus, yet it has some serious problems :
* the T.F. as it stands uses clearly Christian phrases and names Christ as Messiah, it could not possibly have been written by the devout Jew Josephus (who remained a Jew and refused to call anyone "messiah" in his book which was partly about how false messiahs kept leading Israel astray.),
* The T.F. was not mentioned by any of the early Church fathers who reviewed Josephus.... (shortened)

In short - this passage is possibly a total forgery (or at best a corrupt form of a lost original.)
But, yes, it COULD just be actual evidence for Jesus - late, corrupt, controversial but just POSSIBLY real historical evidence.

I can't believe you actually used this? This does not prove anything either way - wouldn't you say? But if you really, i mean really, think about it - there sure is a HELL of a lot of information that backs up his existence - right?

PLINY the Younger (c.112CE)
About 80 years after the alleged events, (and over 40 years after the war) Pliny referred to Christians who worshipped a "Christ" as a god, but there is no reference to a historical Jesus or Gospel events.
So, Pliny is not evidence for a historical Jesus of Nazareth,
just evidence for 2nd century Christians who worshipped a Christ.
www.earlychristianwritings.com...

Yes not absolute evidence. But isn't it weird that people were recorded worshiping "Christ"? This Christ, by biblical records, was also Jesus. Doesn't take a scientist to realise something was up with all these people worshiping someone called Christ. No?

TACITUS (c.112CE)
(shortened)
This evidence speaks AGAINST it being based on any Roman records -
but merely a few details which Tacitus gathered from Christian stories circulating in his time (c.f. Pliny.)
So, this passage is NOT evidence for Jesus,
it's just evidence for 2nd century Christian stories about Jesus.

And people all made up the same stories and they were recorded because why? It wasn't important to them? Or this "so called" Christ was just a cool name that people used? These writers who were supposedly "credible" were willing to write a whole lot of BS and blow their credibility?

SUETONIUS (c.115CE)

Roughly 80-90 years after the alleged Gospel events, (about 75 years after the war) Suetonius refers to a "Chrestus" who stirred the Jews to trouble in Rome during Claudius' time, but:
* this "Chrestus" is a Greek name (from "useful"), and is also a mystic name for an initiate, it is not the same as "Christos"
* this Chrestus was apparently active in Rome, Jesus never was.
So,
this passage is not evidence for Jesus,

Then how about this?

Harris [Harr.3Cruc, 22; see also Harr.GosP5, 354, VanV.JONT, 34-5] notes that the substitution of an "e" for an "i" was "a common error in the spelling of proper names" at the time; Van Voorst adds the peculiarity of a gravestone that offers both spellings at once! Harris also says that because Suetonius did not say, "at the institution of a certain Chrestus," the historian expected that his readers would know the person that he was referring to - hence, this "Chrestus" could not have been merely a Jewish agitator, for there was only one possible "Chrestus" that Suetonius could have been referring to that would have been so well known at the time he was writing (120 AD). It may be that Suetonius wrongly presumed from one of his sources that Chrestus had at some time in the past personally delivered His message to Rome, and that is why he seems to indicate that Chrestus was directly behind the agitation. [ibid., 356] Harris also explains, in an amusing footnote, that to Greek ears, the name "Christos" would have sounded like something drawn from medical or building technology, meaning either "anointed" or "plastered"! (The Romans who heard these Jews talking about "Christus" assumed that, perhaps, another type of "plastering" was going on!) So, they switched it to the more comprehensible "Chrestus," which means "useful one." Harris further indicates, via a quote from the 4th-century Latin Christian Lactantius, that Jesus was commonly called "Chrestus" by those who were ignorant.

... common problem which still exists.

In short -
none of these alleged "evidences" stand up to scrutiny.
Iasion

Whose scrutiny? I think there is not enough evidence, regardless at how long we make this thread, to prove he didn't exist. it's really just people who can't handle the possibility that will take something like SUETONIUS and try and make it credible with out the proper consideration given to lack of education at the time and known mistakes in spelling etc. If we want to dismiss the bible, again - and i see you did not comment on - the evidence found at archaeological digs supports, ACCURATELY, information in the bible. Or, possibly those archaeologists were also smoking something? Same stuff as the guys writing the bible?

Nah, it is perhaps hopeful to some that he may not have existed. That's cool, it's personal to each of us.

[edit on 12/9/2008 by shearder]

Originally posted by TruthParadox

Originally posted by sir_chancealot
I am going to ask for the third time. And so far, no one has answered me.

What year is it again?

In answering that question, you'll have all the proof you need.

Why it is the year 2008 CE, good sir. Did you hit your head? Amnesia is a serious condition which should be checked.

2008 years from WHAT EVENT?