reply to post by NonKonphormist
I've studied a tad into this. And the fact is that -using the same methods we use to decide if other historical figures around jesus' time period that
were not royalty , etc, existed- its pretty safe to assume the guy existed, regardless of his divinity. People who ask for proof should be more
specific about what 'proof' they're looking for.
1.The immediacy of the growing christian cult
2. The lack of an argument against the growing cult on the grounds that 'he never existed' which would have been the easiest argument to make, and
even record- yet none exist. This argument is especially salient in light of the factions in judaism at the time, which pitted sect against sect
3. Writings by the non-christian historian Josephus in his works on the Jews
4.The prevalence of men like Jesus who we accept as 'existing' with no greater evidence then the evidence we have for jesus
5. Jewish sources that expound a little more on the missing elements of the trial of Jesus, and what they believe he was tried for.
All of these things are facts, and for a guy who lived 2000 years ago, they're pretty good evidence of his existence. Nobody would have or could have
taken the guy's picture. Extensive records weren't kept back then, at least not available to us. All and all the case is pretty good. His divinity is
another matter, but as far as his existence, there's far more reason to believe in it then to doubt it.
Jesus' ministry was short lived. He was not rich, and he preached mostly to the kind of people who would be illiterate. There are not works in his
hand or images of him, because, first, he didn't teach through writing, and second, until his supposed death and resurrection, there was nothing
particularly remarkable about Jesus in that time or place.
One thing's for certain, the immediate growth of the religion following his death, with no corresponding records of arguments being made his
non-existence (in that political/religous environment), is about as contemporaneous as you get for a person who lived the life Jesus allegedly lived.
Again, there's more reason to believe then to doubt. There's much better arguments to be made against religion then "this person, who probably existed
didn't exist!! doesn't that p*** you off? na na na na na na."
But anything can be doubted if the doubter wants to doubt.
edit on 22-11-2010 by snusfanatic because: (no reason given)