Why is there no real proof of Jesus existing outside of biblical references?

reply to post by Spectral Norm


These references are all Christian references except for the Babylonian Talmud which would be about the only Jewish reference to Jesus and is a reference I have not heard of before. Wasn't the Talmud written considerably earlier than when Jesus was supposed to have lived, so its reference would have been to the expected Messiah surely? In fact, we should have seen references to Jesus in Jewish literature all over the place, had he have existed because although Jesus was reputed to have taught to Gentiles the bulk of his teaching had to have been to Jews and this would have caused no end of trouble with the Pharisees and Sadduccees.

Having a Jewish Grandmother my family straddles several religious backgrounds but I don't know one Jew who would acknowledge that either he lived of that the Jews crucified him - they would have stoned him actually back in those days as the Romans let them deal with their own religious offenders who they saw trying to change the law.

reply to post by Shiloh7


Josephus, Tacitus, and Suetonius were not Christians, as far as I know. Or are you saying that you believe that the references to Jesus are later Christian interpolations? If so, I would be interested in knowing why you think so.

Also, if memory serves, the Babylonian Talmud was put together during the Late Antiquity, so maybe 200-400 AD.

reply to post by Spectral Norm


By the way, I looked it up to refresh my memory, the relevant TalBab section is Sanhedrin 43a-b, among others, but that is the most specific one, I think.

reply to post by Spectral Norm


The writings we have passed down through the centuries, consist of very few originals unless in stone or tablet form. Constantine and his scribes went to a great deal of trouble creating a religion that they could run through the State to benefit the State. So in one aspect whether it was Jesus or Apolloius's religious instructions they utilised, the teachings that the people were following were worked into a scripture that was acceptable to the Emperor and put the fear of loosing one's soul to hell into his subjects.

Rome has been in sole charge of our religious scriptures since Constantine's Nicea's arrangements and as the normal people were illiterate and kept that way until comparatively recently you can only rely on what Rome tells everyone was in the scriptures and who said and did what. Once the publivc libraries were burned, most religious documents were kept in monasteries or Rome.
Its not that long ago all religious services were in Latin, which the ordinary folk didn't even speak.

Regarding Josephus and the other two you mention what they wrote comes under what Rome decided to release and I seem to remember that Josephus was under Vespasian's control.

Regarding the Babylonian Talmud. You are right in that it was not written down until well after Jesus/Apollonius's time but the Jewish Scribes claim the Talmud is partly a collection of traditions Moses gave them in oral form. If you have read it, I would be amazed if you were not shocked by some of its teachings especially on how to treat the goy and especially goy babies. Apparently part of the trouble with J/A is that he condemned the traditions of the Mishnah (early Talmud) and this is why the Pharasees etc etc hated him and his views on their law.

reply to post by Shiloh7


Thanks for your reply, although I must say that I found it a bit confusing. Perhaps you can help me to sort it out.

You mentioned that Roman Emperor Constantine the Great created a religion that he could run. I have spent several hours today looking for ancient sources attesting to this, but unfortunately, I was unable to find anything. I have read Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History, as well as his Life of Constantine, and although he frequently mentions various deeds of Constantine, he does not mention this plan of Constantine's. This is peculiar, since Eusebius was quite well-acquainted with the Emperor; in fact, we even have, in the Life of Constantine, some letters from the Emperor to Eusebius. But no matter, I am sure that it is well-attested in other ancient sources. I am wondering if you might be able to help me by pointing out which ones. Incidentally, Latin and koine Greek are okay with me, since I have developed a good measure of proficiency with both.

Also, you seemed to indicate that the New Testament canon was decided upon at the First Council of Nicaea. I was completely unaware of this. I am familiar with the fact that the Arian controversy was settled there, resulting in what is today known as the Nicene Creed, in particular, the part about consubstantiality, or homoousios in Greek. And I know about the controversy regarding the date of Easter. I have read Philip Schaff's The Seven Ecumenical Councils (Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, Series II, Volume 14), but I could not find any mention that scriptural canon was on the agenda there. It would be very helpful to me if you would tell me where you learned of it.

Now, regarding Tacitus, the passage that refers to Christ was wriiten in the 110's AD, perhaps during the reign of Trajan. Therefore, naturally, I am wondering why Trajan might have pressured Tacitus into writing that Christ was executed during the reign of Tiberius, at the hands of the Roman Procurator, Pontius Pilate. But alas, once again I have come up empty.

Likewise, I am very interested to learn why Hadrian ordered Suetonius to write an update to Tacitus on Christians, Nero, and the Great Fire of 64 AD, and why he felt it necessary to have Suetonius write that some troublemaking Jews, instigated by someone named Chrestus, got kicked out of Rome during the reign of Claudius.

I also need some help with understanding your remarks about Josephus and the Babylonian Talmud, but I have to run along, so perhaps another time. Thanks very much for your time and consideration.

I would suppose all of those Christian men and women and children that was fed to the lions in Rome would be a pretty good testament to the life and existence of Jesus Christ. They died for their faith in the Gospel of Jesus .

reply to post by SimonPeter

Actually, it would not.

Heaven's Gate comes to mind.

reply to post by daskakik


I fail to see your logic with Heavens Gate . There would be no Christians to feed to the lions if there was no Jesus . Those Christians validated Jesus with their lives .

reply to post by SimonPeter

They died for their beliefs although there was no truth to it.

Same deal with any martyred christians. All they validated was their belief in Jesus not the existance of that person. All they had were stories, just like many other martyrs.

reply to post by daskakik


And you are an authority on the subject ? Or is that just what you want to believe ?

reply to post by SimonPeter

Neither, but the fact that people die for their beliefs doesn't prove that what they believe in is true. Simple as that.

I'm sure you would not be so quick to accept the existance of other dieties even though people have given their live's because of their belief in them.

SimonPeter
reply to post by daskakik

SimonPeterAnd you are an authority on the subject ? Or is that just what you want to believe ?

If not, (daskakik, totally run over here) why dont you SimonPeter proclaim your individuated Authority on The Subject of self revelation; or offer something else that YOU believe in that finds a better fit FOR EVERYONE ELSE LIVING IN THIS UNIVERSE, whom thoughts differ from yours (THE HINDU for instance). You seem to have the Master EGO Plan; share it (will I make money). Im all ears (and I am holding good faith intentions backwards/forwards in your efforts to make me a millionaire, spiritually). Dont waste your time ruminating, (you have the plan in place) we are all on pins and needles waiting. So you say you have a most important Belief System we should all be aware of as it stands above all others? HOW SO? What is the secret knoweledge and what does it cost?

reply to post by Spectral Norm


No? Well, gee, that's too bad. I don't want to believe that everything you said was speculative fantasy based upon no hard evidence whatsoever, but in view of the lack of evidence, what choice do I have?

reply to post by vethumanbeing


Do you embrace Hinduism ? Hinduism has many gods like old ancient Rome . The Hindu purpose of live life is Dharma - the fulfillment of ones purpose , Artha -prosperity, Kama desire, sexuality , enjoyment Moksha and enlightenment .
I can see why it would be a popular religion . There does not seem to be heaven or hell so live life as you will until it catches up to you like Bonnie and Clyde . You never would face judgment for your deeds . Make your own god ! No bad or good Karma . Next life you might be a rock . Rocks don't die !

reply to post by Spectral Norm

Now, regarding Tacitus, the passage that refers to Christ was wriiten in the 110's AD, perhaps during the reign of Trajan. Therefore, naturally, I am wondering why Trajan might have pressured Tacitus into writing that Christ was executed during the reign of Tiberius, at the hands of the Roman Procurator, Pontius Pilate. But alas, once again I have come up empty.

Likewise, I am very interested to learn why Hadrian ordered Suetonius to write an update to Tacitus on Christians, Nero, and the Great Fire of 64 AD, and why he felt it necessary to have Suetonius write that some troublemaking Jews, instigated by someone named Chrestus, got kicked out of Rome during the reign of Claudius.

I also need some help with understanding your remarks about Josephus and the Babylonian Talmud,

It's hard to follow along and know what's been discussed and what has been overlooked when you enter a thread that's 50 plus pages long already. But, these issues have been discussed in this thread over and over, ad nauseam. All these issues have been debunked by scholars, again and again. Rather than repost what has already been hashed over, more than once or twice already in this thread, I'll just leave you with this link, in which all your issues are addressed.

If, after reading these rebuttals to the existence of Jesus Christ, you have more to add as to proof of his existence, please do come back and argue them! Otherwise, it's pretty well confirmed that, outside of the Bible, there is no proof of the existence of Jesus Christ.

Jesus Never Existed

SimonPeter
reply to post by veteranhumanbeing

 

Do you embrace Hinduism ? Hinduism has many gods like old ancient Rome . The Hindu purpose of live life is Dharma - the fulfillment of ones purpose , Artha -prosperity, Kama desire, sexuality , enjoyment Moksha and enlightenment .
I can see why it would be a popular religion . There does not seem to be heaven or hell so live life as you will until it catches up to you like Bonnie and Clyde . You never would face judgment for your deeds . Make your own god ! No bad or good Karma . Next life you might be a rock . Rocks don't die !

I dont embrace any very HIGH entropy "dogma" that lowers the ability of the human to evolve (which describes all organized religions). I am Gnostic (this may sound as a contradiction) as one would think a "BELIEF SYSTEM APPLIES". No, its not measurable not a totem; not an idol to be worshiped as hung on a cruciform, it has is footprints in the Essene legacy (destroyed by the Romans in 70AD Qumran). It is the basis for FreeMasonry. Actually all forms of 'religion' apply to the timing of the century, decade and locale. You cannot MAKE your own God (but others will attempt to make one for you), as if you could make a chocolate milkshake out of dirt. You are that God form on earth NOW; already as its particulate lower form expression (attempting to describe itself). Where do you think you came from? Spiritually; bodily? Did evolution create you? Gnostic thought is all knowing; its just a given total awareness, never questioned. This is as much a punishment in this world as the tribulations are almost not worth the trouble of explaining it (its too abstract within linear thoughtform). Thankyou SimonPeter for asking.

Is there any religion can proof the average lifetime, average state of health, average wealth ownership, or even the average odds of winning of their believers has any difference from the nonbelievers? If they can proof it, I'd like to Join their religion. but unfortunately, up to now, no religion can proof their GOD has any influence on their believers. So, any religion is lie.

SimonPeter
reply to post by daskakik

 

I fail to see your logic with Heavens Gate . There would be no Christians to feed to the lions if there was no Jesus . Those Christians validated Jesus with their lives .

Daskakik may have been actually referencing "Heavens Gate" the movie by Michael Cimino. After making "The Deer Hunter" was given a gazillion dollars by greedy studio executives; to do his thing with the subject matter (of all things) the Johnson county wars. It was a money pit fiasco financially, and Im not sure it was ever distributed to theaters. Kris Kristopherson played the role of Jesus in this epic 3 hour failure.

reply to post by vethumanbeing

No I meant the cult.

They commited suicide because they believed a spaceship hidden in the tail of the Hale-Bopp comet was going to pick them up.

The point being that people dying for their beliefs doesn't make their beliefs true.

windword
reply to post by Spectral Norm

 

It's hard to follow along and know what's been discussed and what has been overlooked when you enter a thread that's 50 plus pages long already.

Yes, I've seen it. 50 pages of incoherent nonsense does not suffice to persuade me.

But, these issues have been discussed in this thread over and over, ad nauseam.

I'll agree with the ad nauseam part. Repeating the same incorrect speculation over and over again does not somehow make it correct.

All these issues have been debunked by scholars, again and again.

It is my understanding that the weight of scholarly opinion is that the passages of Tacitus and Suetonius are authentic. But let us, for the moment, leave aside appeal to authority, which really doesn't work for me anyway. Do you have any evidence to the contrary?

Rather than repost what has already been hashed over, more than once or twice already in this thread, I'll just leave you with this link, in which all your issues are addressed.

Yes, I looked at that. Thanks for the link, but it looks to me like its author is merely engaging in speculation. We can go over that point by point, if you like.

If, after reading these rebuttals to the existence of Jesus Christ, you have more to add as to proof of his existence, please do come back and argue them!

Otherwise, it's pretty well confirmed that, outside of the Bible, there is no proof of the existence of Jesus Christ.

I have already presented it, but we can surely discuss it, if you like. It's alright with me if you want to discount it; however, you cannot expect me to swallow speculation and outright falsehood merely because it is touted as factual. Otherwise, it's pretty well confirmed that, outside of the Bible, there is a lot of evidence that Jesus Christ might have existed.