Has Archaeological Evidence for Jesus Been Discovered?

So i had a discussion on ATS about if Jesus was a living person or not, so i just wanted to share with you a story.

Skeptics have often pointed out that no archaeological evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ has been discovered. And they are correct, at least perhaps up until the present. A recent incredible discovery may put to rest that criticism.

A secondary issue must first be considered. Is it reasonable to expect such artifacts or inscriptions? After all, the man Jesus was not a prominent governmental leader. He was essentially an itinerant preacher, with few possessions, and eventually suffered the death of a common outlaw. Would the Romans have recorded His life or death with an inscription or statue? Certainly not.

With or without the ossuary or other archeological evidence, we can still be confident that the events are true. The Christian faith is a reasonable faith, well grounded in the facts of history, and the Bible is an entirely accurate document. On its teachings we can base our lives and eternal destiny.

Like the text says, its all based on faith..

Link

a reply to: PanPiper

Here is some en.wikipedia.org... eta ..but if you are looking for a tooth brush or a sandal that Jesus might have worn then you will have to consult the vatican :>)

originally posted by: PanPiper
So i had a discussion on ATS about if Jesus was a living person or not, so i just wanted to share with you a story.

I'm atheist and believe there was a man (or men) the Myth Jesus story came out of.

I don't think finding evidence this man lived proves much, if anything.

Proving the Myth - - that would be interesting.

a reply to: Annee

I'm atheist and believe there was a man (or men) the Myth Jesus story came out of.

Personally, I think the "Jesus Story" is just like Isaiah's "Suffering Servant", meant to be seen as an allegorical personification of the Nation of Israel......crucified by the Romans.

a reply to: PanPiper

Institute for Creation Research?

...and the Bible is an entirely accurate document...

The only proof of Jesus is Faith

originally posted by: PanPiper
So i had a discussion on ATS about if Jesus was a living person or not, so i just wanted to share with you a story.

Skeptics have often pointed out that no archaeological evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ has been discovered. And they are correct, at least perhaps up until the present. A recent incredible discovery may put to rest that criticism.

A secondary issue must first be considered. Is it reasonable to expect such artifacts or inscriptions? After all, the man Jesus was not a prominent governmental leader. He was essentially an itinerant preacher, with few possessions, and eventually suffered the death of a common outlaw. Would the Romans have recorded His life or death with an inscription or statue? Certainly not.

With or without the ossuary or other archeological evidence, we can still be confident that the events are true. The Christian faith is a reasonable faith, well grounded in the facts of history, and the Bible is an entirely accurate document. On its teachings we can base our lives and eternal destiny.

Like the text says, its all based on faith..

Link

Well, firstly the assumption about Crucifixion is wrong.

Crucifixion was used to punish slaves, pirates, and enemies of the state. It was considered the most shameful and disgraceful way to die. Condemned Roman citizens were usually exempt from crucifixion except when they were being punished for major crimes against the state, such as high treason.

It wasn't for your 'Common Outlaw'. Source: en.wikipedia.org...

Not to mention that, even in those ages where only select few people could write, you would expect someone performing the miraculous actions attributed to Jesus to have been written about.

Well grounded in the facts of history??? Seriously.

Then why don't we see any records of the mass enslaveent of the Judaic peoples in ancient Egypt?

a reply to: jjsr420

Then why don't we see any records of the mass enslaveent of the Judaic peoples in ancient Egypt?

Likely because that story never was a reality...

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Annee

I'm atheist and believe there was a man (or men) the Myth Jesus story came out of.

Personally, I think the "Jesus Story" is just like Isaiah's "Suffering Servant", meant to be seen as an allegorical personification of the Nation of Israel......crucified by the Romans.

I actually believe there is a real story. The "terrorist" one.

He was no pacifist. But, that's not what the threads about.

a reply to: PanPiper

Although I am a Christian, I have to say that all three names on the ossuary were fairly common at the time.

Unusual as they were in combination, it could still be coincidental.

Several years ago, I read (on the internet, of course) that historical records of Jesus were found and that ultimately he was hanged for blasphemy and his body was thrown off the hill where he was hanged to rot at the bottom of the hill. The hill's name was Thief's Hill or Hangman's Hill or something like that. I will do a search and see if I can find it. Someone here may remember this article.

I can't seem to find it. Another Mandela effect, perhaps?

a reply to: jjsr420

Why don't we see evidence of something that happened 4,000 years ago to an enslaved people?

I'll let you figure that out.

But why is it relevant to a thread about the historicity of Jesus?

BTW. The Roman Historian, Tacitus, who had no love of Christianity and was therefore not "biased" (as is generally assumed about "Christian sources") said the following about the burning of Rome only 31 years after the death of Christ:

"Therefore, to stop the rumor (that he had set Rome on fire), he (Emperor Nero) falsely charged with guilt, and punished with the most fearful tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities. Christus, the founder of that name, was put to death as a criminal by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea, in the reign of Tiberius, but the pernicious superstition - repressed for a time, broke out yet again, not only through Judea, - where the mischief originated, but through the city of Rome also, whither all things horrible and disgraceful flow from all quarters, as to a common receptacle, and where they are encouraged. Accordingly first those were arrested who confessed they were Christians; next on their information, a vast multitude were convicted, not so much on the charge of burning the city, as of "hating the human race.

In their very deaths they were made the subjects of sport: for they were covered with the hides of wild beasts, and worried to death by dogs, or nailed to crosses, or set fire to, and when the day waned, burned to serve for the evening lights. Nero offered his own garden players for the spectacle, and exhibited a Circensian game, indiscriminately mingling with the common people in the dress of a charioteer, or else standing in his chariot. For this cause a feeling of compassion arose towards the sufferers, though guilty and deserving of exemplary capital punishment, because they seemed not to be cut off for the public good, but were victims of the ferocity of one man."

Is that historical enough for you?

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: jjsr420

Then why don't we see any records of the mass enslaveent of the Judaic peoples in ancient Egypt?

Likely because that story never was a reality...

We do have a few things that indicate that it might be more than legend:

Moses was not a Hebrew name. It is an ancient Egyptian name meaning "of the God". (For instance Thutmoses means of the god Thut).

We have archaeological evidence that the area of Canaan was invaded and largely subdued at about the time the Israelite's were moving into their promised land. We have evidence of defeated fortress cities and after that we have evidence of Israelite society and warfare with adjacent states until the Israelites established a monarchy.

Egyptian architecture at the time primarily used straw bricks for building. The account in Exodus makes mention of the Israelite's being forced to manufacture straw bricks.

Also, strange happenings after the rule of Thutmose I may indicate that his daughter, Hatsheput, may have ruled for a while before her male cousin, Thutmose III, assumed the throne and there were also two Pharaohs with overlapping reigns (Thutmose III and Amenhotep II). Amenhotep II's firstborn died shortly after he assumed the throne.

a reply to: PanPiper

Don't ever question Muhammad and his questionable past and hypocrisy

But saying jesus was fake is ok

A poor man imprisoned and executed by the elites and they wonder why no real records exist.

Why would the Jews or Romans leave anything about a fake massiah who they just had executed

Atheists make these claims to make people angry. It's like sayings your mom's fat they wanna make it personal to Christians and the best way to do that is by saying your messiah isn't real or was made up.

Quite petty really

a reply to: Annee

Please enlighten us on the warlord jesus which if actually did exist as you claim would have actually been recorded by the Romans and hunted.

the Jews would have preferred a warlord messiah that liberated them from the romans but got love your neighbor instead.

The terrorist jesus you claim makes no logical sense and contradictory to every thing historical and practiced for 2000 years by Christians

We have the bible

a reply to: JDmOKI

Oh please. Jesus isn't the only Avatar, Demi-God, Son of God, etc. with a questionable existence. It's not because people want to be mean to christians either.

It's because people are smart enough not to believe every story about some Magic Man performing miracles without some proof. It's called not being gullible.

It's the same reasoning you use for not believing in every other God or Avatar that come out of every other culture so don't act like you don't do the same. You just don't like it when the same logic is used with your choice in God. Do you not believe in Zeus or Thor because you just want to be mean to Greeks or because Zeus and Thor are just made up??

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: PanPiper
So i had a discussion on ATS about if Jesus was a living person or not, so i just wanted to share with you a story.

I'm atheist and believe there was a man (or men) the Myth Jesus story came out of.

I don't think finding evidence this man lived proves much, if anything.

Proving the Myth - - that would be interesting.

I am atheist as well. However during the time Jesus was supposed to exist it was common for scammers, people claiming to be prophets or just out right claiming to be gods. With that if you take into account what Christ means in Latin ( the Messiah) it is no surprise that the word ( it is not a name) Christ maybe found in some places. With all that in mind I do not find there was ever a man that existed as is described in the new testament as Jesus Christ.

a reply to: JDmOKI

Why would the Romans make record of it? Because they made records of even the most mundane things as did the Egyptians. Much like we do today.

originally posted by: In4ormant
We have the bible

LOL, and?

In the future people will have the Lord of the rings books or the Star Wars movies.

Again, I say, and?