It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Historical Jesus

page: 1
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 05:32 PM
link   
Something I've wondered about since I first got interested in conspiracy theories: other than the bible, is there any proof that Jesus lived and died 2000+ years ago?
I tend to lean toward the fact that it is based on more ancient religions. And shaped to fit the faithful of that time.
But, the Catholic in me still holds on to years of religious teachings.

So, anyone out there with historical information of Jesus' life and death, please post here.
I DO NOT want any bible quotes, as they are obviously biased. I am looking for secualr, historical information, if it exists.

Please, no flamers or trolls. Only serious responses.

[edit on 6-6-2004 by DontTreadOnMe]




posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 05:36 PM
link   
Not to be a troll but where would historical information of the subject come from other than the bible? I am by no means educated on the matter so I guess I'll have to wit for a response too.



posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 05:37 PM
link   
DTOM,
It'll take a little work to pull up the factual detail, but I've read accounts of historical data that supports the existence and lineage of Jesus. (i.e Roman History)
CS

[edit on 6/6/2004 by CommonSense]



posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 05:45 PM
link   
I see you, there were written records due to the Roman occupation. There may have been learned writings somewhere. If he indeed made the ripple in the area that the bible says, there should be some writings somewhere.
This is something I have wanted to ask for a long time. If the information is out there, someone here will find it. I remain confident.

Common Sense~~tralk about way above, if you find that info, I would be most interested and most impressed.



posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 05:53 PM
link   
I started a thread with a similar question awhile ago,
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The Dead Sea Scrolls are a good start.




Although the Qumran community existed during the time of the ministry of Jesus, none of the Scrolls refer to Him, nor do they mention any of His follower's described in the New Testament.


www.nobeliefs.com...




ALL CLAIMS OF JESUS DERIVE FROM HEARSAY ACCOUNTS

No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. 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. Although one can argue that many of these writings come from fraud or interpolations, I will use the information and dates to show that even if these sources did not come from interpolations, they could still not serve as reliable evidence for a historical Jesus, simply because all sources derive from hearsay accounts.

Hearsay means information derived from other people rather than on a witness' own knowledge.

Courts of law do not generally allow hearsay as testimony, and nor does honest modern scholarship. Hearsay provides no proof or good evidence, and therefore, we should dismiss it.




www.atheists.org...




Although what follows may fairly be interpreted to be a proof of the non-historicity of Jesus, it must be realized that the burden of proof does not rest upon the skeptic in this matter. As always is the case, the burden of proof weighs upon those who assert that some thing or some process exists. If someone claims that he never has to shave because every morning before he can get to the bathroom he is assaulted by a six-foot rabbit with extremely sharp teeth who trims his whiskers better than a razor - if someone makes such a claim, no skeptic need worry about constructing a disproof. Unless evidence for the claim is produced, the skeptic can treat the claim as false. This is nothing more than sane, every-day practice.


The Romans (from my knowledge) never once mention a Jesus like figure in the vincinity of Palenstine. If there was a physical healer in Palenstine, the Romans would have went head of heels to find this man and cure them of any ailments they needed, for they were one of most superstisous lot around.

Deep



posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 06:04 PM
link   
ZeroDeep, the search terms is used did not come up with your thread. Thank you for it, I'll gladly check it out.

Also, would not Rome have kept records of those they crucified...just asking. Pilate was not the most balanced man, I believe he committed suicide? So, you'd think he'd seek healing.
However, Jesus' healing apparently only worked for those whose hearts were in the right place. So, total non-believers may not have benefitted.

Jumping around, if those Three Magi really were, you'd think they talk Jesus up upon there return to their homelands.



posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 06:06 PM
link   
IMHO - The fact that so many people wrote about his life should be proof enough that he existed.



posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 06:16 PM
link   
But, who wrote about him? His disciples?
They don't count in my estimation. I'm looking for those who heard and perhaps did not believe. I know his public life was brief, but that area of the world was hardly in a vaccuum. Heck, Rome was occupying it.

As I said earlier, there's several ancient relgions with similar ideas (like the Trinity). I'd like to know if the religion I grew up with is based on another religion.
It's not like all of a sudden I'm not believing that God is!!!



posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 06:27 PM
link   
I don't agree with that at all. If we are to believe the story of the crucifixtion then it makes sense that the Romans try not to mention Jesus again, after all he was causing social tension and was a challenge to Roman rule in the area. They would most certainly try to bury his memory instead of keeping it alive by recording the details of his life. In addition I doubt that many Roman writings and documents concerning an area that they considered unimportant would be preserved for very long.

Here is a link to some writings by the historian Flavius Josephus a jew who lived in 66 a.d who wrote about the jewish rebelion of the time.

www.carm.org...

And here is a list of non christian references to jesus

www.rationalchristianity.net...

Many people do not believe jesus to be devine, and that may even be true, but it just seems to me very improbable that a figure like that could just be invented out of nothing. Its not even like the ancient greek myths of say herecles because in this instance the descriptions of his life and what happened to him have a clear historical timeframe and place.



posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 06:32 PM
link   
I found more historical evidence that Jesus lived. Hope it helps.




Historical testimony

The first set of historical records of course is the New Testament. The 27 books of the NT refer to the life of Jesus.

If Jesus was not real, why did Matthew and Luke go to such lengths to trace his lineage? Making up a person is one thing. But assigning him a set of relatives is another thing.

People also point to the discrepancies in the stories of Jesus among the four gospels as proof that Jesus was not real. But actually, it shows that all four had different perspectives of Jesus. It shows that all of them did not have a common source of information other than the life of Jesus.

All four writers give verifiable names and places in their testimonies. We can check out where is Bethlehem, Jerusalem, Golgotha, King Herod, and many other things. People making up a person would not go to the lengths of having everything verifiable except the main person in the story.

There are also many other secular writers that talked about Jesus.

In 112 AD, a Roman historian named Cornelius Tacitus wrote:

"Christus, the founder of the name(Christians), was put to death by Pontius Pilate."

Another Roman historian, Suetonius, wrote:

"As the Jews were making constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome"

During the early second century, a Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus, wrote:

"Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure."

"The Roman sources show a vague awareness that Jesus was a historical figure as well as the object of a cult; the reliable Jewish sources tell us that he was a Jewish teacher who was put to death for sorcery and false prophecy and that he had a brother named James. The Jewish evidence is especially valuable because of the hostility between Jews and Christians at the time: it would have been easy for the Jewish side to question the existence of Jesus, but this they never did." (NGME 94)

www.otweb.com...



posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 06:32 PM
link   
DTOM,
Here's a few links. I think in the end what you'll be faced with is a lot of history of the time coinciding with Biblical writings. In terms of hard proof, I don't think it'll be there. Your opinion will be formed by the synthesis of history, scripture and a feeling or knowing deep within you. The last link on the list is pretty interesting. The author is a former atheist who took a long, investigative type approach in writing two books, The Case For Faith and The Case For Christ. I found it an interesting read because he seemed to be in the midst of his journey as he wrote. Inotherwords, I didn't get a sense that he was trying to support a position as much as he was trying to formulate one. If he did take a position, he also tried to debunk it. Have fun, I'll dig up more.

CS

www.pbs.org...
www.pbs.org...
www.pbs.org...
www.pbs.org...
www.the-case-for-christ.com...

BTW I'm only looking for sites and info that present both sides of the issue. There's way to much biased stuff out there such as nobeliefs.com. Some are pure atheist trying to come off from a scholarly research oriented approach.


[edit on 6/6/2004 by CommonSense]



posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 06:35 PM
link   
TheExZone~~
this is just the kind of info I was interested in. Thanks for those links.

Your conclusion about Rome not mentioning Jesus was interesting. So, you don't think they'd record those people they killed off, like a census of executions.
(Like brownie points from the colonies to the Emperor, if you get my drift?)



posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 06:44 PM
link   
Well there were find of the cloth he was warapped in, in his tomb. Also in ancient Roman hisotry Constantine built an enourmous Church (i thikn it was a church) near the place of Jesus's crycifiction, and tomb.



posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 06:48 PM
link   
You mean the Shroud of Turin? That's been the subject of much testing and debate. I think the last I heard, it's not real. And, I know it's been discussed here.

As far as Constantine, he lived a few hundred years later, so no proof there.



posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 06:59 PM
link   
Here's a site that approaches the historical Jesus from a very Hebrew perspective. I wouldn't say that I buy into their beliefs but it helps to present a better historical perspective. It's important to remember during the immediate post Jesus time in history that followers of Jesus, they weren't called Christians at that time, were persecuted by both the traditional Jews and the Romans. The Jews wanted to end any discussion of Jesus and, at least some of their leaders, conspired with the ROmans to kill Jesus. The Romans feared the followers of Jesus because they had no fear of the Roman authority. Even today, these are the most feared of any "rebel". This persecution is one of the reasons there is not much written during the time of Jesus. It also needs to be pointed out that the storyteller played a very significant role in Jewsih society at the time of Jesus. Literacy was very limited and even Old Testament verses were handed down by word-of-mouth. Storytellers travelled from town to town and passed along the Jewish history. This is how they made a living.

In any event, here's another link.
www.netzarim.co.il...



posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by DontTreadOnMe
TheExZone~~
this is just the kind of info I was interested in. Thanks for those links.

Your conclusion about Rome not mentioning Jesus was interesting. So, you don't think they'd record those people they killed off, like a census of executions.
(Like brownie points from the colonies to the Emperor, if you get my drift?)


I think they probably have a record of how many they killed, and perhaps who but I don't think they would be documents that they would put alot of effort into perserving.



posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 07:31 PM
link   
Josephus Flavius - Jewish Historian
Antiquities Of The Jews.
Book 18 Chapter 3.3
Book 20 Chapter 9.1

Pliny the Younger - Roman Officer
Pliny Letter

Tacitus - Roman historian
Annals Book XV
From his Annals:
"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular."

Suetonius - Roman historian (possibly a source)


[edit on 6-6-2004 by zero_snaz]



posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 07:33 PM
link   


I don't agree with that at all. If we are to believe the story of the crucifixtion then it makes sense that the Romans try not to mention Jesus again, after all he was causing social tension and was a challenge to Roman rule in the area. They would most certainly try to bury his memory instead of keeping it alive by recording the details of his life. In addition I doubt that many Roman writings and documents concerning an area that they considered unimportant would be preserved for very long.



That's an interesting theory which I too have entertained. According to popular bias, Jesus had created such havoc in Rome that the entire people were shamed, he touted one of the greatest revolutions in history, and layed down the foundations of one of the most powerfull forces on this planet. The Romans could in theory, being shamed, decided to broom this revolution under the carpet to save the remaing honour they may have had.

Deep



posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 07:45 PM
link   
KingLizard, thats an interesting site you have posted. But it is still a Christian Bias.




Did Jesus really exist? If someone cannot believe that Jesus Christ existed, that person would have a difficult time believing that anybody else has ever existed. There is a tremendous amount of evidence pointing to the life of Jesus Christ.


This is exactly the question at hand. Other messiahs, historical figures, prophets have more proof to claim thier existence than Jesus. It is much easier to provide proof for the Existence of Constantine then Jesus.




How do we even go about proving that any particular person actually lived? How can we even prove that George Washington lived? Or even Thomas Edison?

There are a couple of ways. One is to look at historical records. We know that George Washington lived by all the books, writings, biographies, newspapers that have documented his existance. We have paintings of him. We even have his wooden false teeth.


I think we can also sit this on out.
The fact that Jesus has not left anything other than words written many many years after his death, speaks volumes. The Shroud of Turin is highly debated. The actual image of Jesus us also speculated to be false, as Colonel/Hamilton had pointed out in a thread created some time ago.
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

The above is a thread created in homage to this dogma


Deep



posted on Jun, 6 2004 @ 07:53 PM
link   
DTOM,
Look further into the Shroud of Turin. Carbon dating doesn't work because the cloth was exposed to smoke in at least one fire where it was smoke damaged. I'll look for another link regarding the image itself. The image did not permeate the fabric but rather, sits on top of it. In several studies Jew and atheist scientists alike had no alternative but to say they could not explain its origin. Most concluded it was authentic. I haven't checked the link, but I believe www.catholic.com has links to the research. BTW, it's a great website for a lot of issues. I hope it helps you.
CS



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join