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

Im laughing your this far in and no one thought to check what the romans wrote about jesus.

Josephus a roman historian wrote in the "Antiquities Of The Jews"

"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. He drew over to him both many of the Jews and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ. And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day."

And then there was Cornelius Tacitus another roman historian He mentions christ and explains how this superstitious religion that started in judea made its way to rome. And explains how christians were being blamed for burning rome in 64 AD.

Christus: Annals 15.44.2-8

"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..."

Custodian
reply to post by Scope and a Beam

 

Did you see my short story entry?

Check it out.

You will see your proof if you examine the evidence.

Has anyone?

reply to post by iRoyalty


I've documented above that the notion that

". . . to a book that has been changed a silly silly amount of times over the past 2000 years."

is an absurd lie from hell quite at odds with the true FACTS.

However, I had no delusions that folks on the other side would be the least bit influenced by THE FACTS.

. . . which illustrates why some of us don't bother to post more proofs. Y'all refuse to face the proofs what we do post. Some of us just aren't that much 'into' additional exercises in futility. We haven't found batting our heads against concrete walls of irrational DISBELIEF to be a growthful use of time, energy or foreheads.

What a stinking pile of duplicitous rants and nonsensical claims grreatly at odds with the true history and the true historical record your side luxuriates in. A pig up to its snout in hog wallow is cleaner, more rational and truer to reality.

Truly the Scripture puts it right about the desire to believe a lie in the end times era.

Some seem to have no CAPACITY to do otherwise.

I used to marvel at the Scriptures about how the unbelievers will, in the Tribulation period, see God's mighty miracles, know HE IS GOD . . . and STILL curse God and refuse to repent--and die in their doggedly stubborn rebellion. That boggled my mind. It was hard to wrap my understanding around.

My years on ATS have finally helped me to understand that level of perverse arrogant stubbornness. I can now readily see it happening.

.

reply to post by Gryphon66


Your lack of honorable research true to the facts is showing again.

However, thousands of people will suck-up to that swill with great glee.

Thankfully, such assertions are abjectly askew from the reality.

One of my posts above documents the absurdity of such assertions.

reply to post by Gryphon66


Sooooooooooo a miraculous prophetic writing by Enoch prophetically predicting Christ's life can't be allowed . . .

by . . . drum roll . . .

y'all.

Because?

ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh . . . riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight . . .

"JUST 'CAUSE."

Just 'cause y'all have decreed arbitrarily that the miraculous CANNOT occur.

What brilliance.
What objectivity.

What unhistorical blindness.
What a thrillingly irrational obtuse pseudo-argument.

That's a major reason that the Children of Israel demoted the Book of Enoch in their culture. It became too obvious that he had predicted the life of Jesus The Christ. They couldn't have that in their canon any longer. LOL.

Nevertheless, God still maintained some here and there of the Children of Jacob who knew the truth. Witness the 107 year old Rabbi Kaduri and his miraculous revelation about his Messiah, Jesus the Christ.

Oh, riiiiiiiiiiiiight, can't allow THAT either. The miraculous is aribtrarily disallowed on the face of it . . . 'just 'cause.'

Impressive.

reply to post by Buttonlip


Sorry. I've never observed any evidence for that "LOVE, LOVE, LOVE" to see such evidence.

Quite the opposite is relentlessly demonstrated on this thread.

reply to post by iRoyalty


As has been documented, some of the historical record was put to paper within 30-70 years after the events occurred--certainly within the lifetimes of the FIRST HAND EYE-WITNESSES CONCERNED.

However, I understand how rebellion CANNOT POSSIBLY TOLERATE such evidence.

So continue on with the absurd fantasies spewed so relentlessly hereon. They are laughable and insubstantial at best. But the death grips with which they are held so closely to so many hearts and minds are at least an interesting study in psychology and sociology.

reply to post by daskakik


My God Almighty NEEDS NO defense.

He is God above all Gods.

The 'defense' of THE TRUTH is an act of sacrificial graciousness toward any who might consider the facts more fair-mindedly and learn something.

However, those on my side hereon know better than to hold our breaths waiting for such a rare event in these regions.

reply to post by BO XIAN


Really? So King Henry VIII didn't create the Church of England and the King James bible so he could sleep with more women? How many other rulers in the past 2000 years have done the same? It's not a hidden fact and the fact that you follow a book that men have altered just means you are following corrupted words.

I'm not against God or Jesus, I think there is a lot of good in there, but to follow it blindly... I don't think that's what God would have wanted.

It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in man. It is better to trust in the Lord than to put confidence in princes? (Psalm 118:8-9)

Rulers and man have openly altered text for their own good, the sabboth was altered to convince followers of Mithras to convert. Link

Listen to your own Holy words, do not put faith in a book written by man but in God, worship him in your own way and don't conform to unreliable texts.

edit:

BO XIAN
reply to post by iRoyalty

 

As has been documented, some of the historical record was put to paper within 30-70 years after the events occurred--certainly within the lifetimes of the FIRST HAND EYE-WITNESSES CONCERNED.

Also, I support the existence of Jesus, I just don't support the written word of men, who are easily corrupted especially when confronted with even the smallest amount of power. Also, even first hand witnesses are not reliable and unless either, Jesus wrote it himself, or someone wrote it while he spoke, they are definitely going to be inaccurate, even 30 years later, ever 1 year later, memory is a fickle thing.

So ... "prophecy" from hundreds of years beforehand is now deemed to be evidence of existence?

Well, why not really, if we're going to use material written hundreds of years afterwards as fact.

There is no evidence that "the Jews" dropped The Book of Enoch because Christians started claiming it "predicted" JC's life. If that were the case, (it isn't), they they would have dropped Isaiah and half the Torah. It has obviously been a long-standing Christian tradition to claim anything that could possibly be twisted by fervent belief into something resembling "proof" of Jesus' life and status would be utilized (as the Gospels writers and the Epistle writers desperately point to some Torah reference and scream "SEE JESUS!")

That is the nature of belief based on "faith" though, isn't it? ... remember what the author of Hebrews claimed "Faith is the substance of things hoped for the evidence of things that are not seen."

Most of us understand that something "not seen" doesn't exist and that "hoping that something is true" ... doesn't make it true.

Opinion is not evidence. Writing in ALL CAPS is not evidence. Hopes, prayers, prophecy ... not evidence.

BO XIAN
reply to post by gort51

 

I never have observed arrogance to have much insight.

It tends to smugly prance about with great prissiness as though its attire was spotlessly white and its lofted nose exceedingly justified.

This actually reminds me of something Jesus said! Wait, what was it ... what was it ... oh yes.

"'... Physician, heal thyself.' ..." (Luke 4:23)

Later writers would translate that from the ancient writings as "the pot calling the kettle black." /snark

You are far from the land he mainly walked during the known years but i suggest you paied a visit there.

When you will see the cloth (what is preserved) Christ was in, in his last hours you will know. Trust me.
This is an example out of many and you will know even when not told.

All it takes is a trip and some insightfull mind.

Then maybe you let some, me and Him at peace.
Maybe you will find yours too.

reply to post by GEORGETHEGREEK


One thing that trips me up about Jesus' burial, why was he buried?

The Romans liked to leave people on crosses until they were just bones, the idea of a cross was so everyone could see what happens to criminals, not as an execution.

This is a genuine question by the way.

Agree2Disagree


Akula you're vastly mistaken. Any evidence we have concerning Pythagoras is very deeply intertwined with myth and folklore....

For example, it was commonly thought that Apollo, yes that's right APOLLO was the father of Pythagoras. It was also commonly believed that Pythagoras had a golden thigh. So of course there were "crazy claims"....none of the "evidence" lends credibility towards Pythagoras being a real individual. So no, we don't have much more credible evidence that Pythagoras was an actual person. Unless of course you're saying that the son of Apollo with a golden thigh who thought beans were EVIL and would devour your soul is easier to believe in than the son of God that heals and blesses the sick and meek....

A2D

When we have so many indipentend and reliable accounts of his existence it is easy to spot the lies, myths, and hyperboles. It is a historic scientific method to ''brew'' the true story from multiple accounts.

Many Heros of the past have been described as sons of a god, due to their extraordinary aspects of their life, It was a common thing, a habit and a compliment,

But understanding the concept of their Gods and religion of ancient polytheists, Calling him a son of Apollo was a compliment it means he was born from light and wisdom.
Even if you take literately those few accounts, it is just a drop in the ocean compared to the thousand superstitions that describe Jesus figure.

So with historical scientific studies we can come to healthy conclusions about this historic figure.

The same doesn't apply to Jesus, where the evidence of his existence come only from the dogmatic creators
of christianity who they knew very well each other and obviously they had the same agenda. The few other evidence describes a Christ ( a gifted person) which the early Christians followed ( Without ever meeting him in person) and not Jesus. There were many Christs back then. and 7 different ''messiahs''.

Among the rest of the reasons I described in my previous post, that doesn't even come close to the evidence we have of Pythagoras existence

Ps. Those beans were indeed EVIL. The vast majority of the people in Ancient Greece had the lack of the enzyme G6, and while that made them to avoid some illnesses, they would literally die if they ate this exact bean. I know cause I also lack this enzyme. Among the beans, they also didn't eat meat and I also follow that myself.

Where is the proof that the cloth actually belonged to Jesus?

GEORGETHEGREEK
You are far from the land he mainly walked during the known years but i suggest you paied a visit there.
.......
All it takes is a trip and some insightfull mind........

I have visited the ''Holy Land'' .There is a need of belief and faith and not just insight!

If we had proof of God's existence, there would be no room for faith or belief,
So faith is somehow a shortcut of logic (the need of proof) to come to the wished conclusion.

Ps Γειά σου ρε Ελλάδα....

reply to post by dragonridr


Sorry, if you had read the thread, you would know that Josephus and Tacitus have already been discussed. Those sources have been debunked over and over again.

Josephus' citation is an out and out forgery, an interpolation inserted probably by Eusebius of Caesarea, but certainly by some scribe that felt the need to pad the books, and add lies to bolster the Christian case.

The Tacitus quote isn't referring to the followers of Jesus, who were not called Christians, as there was already several pagan cults using the "Christ" theme at the time. The early followers of Jesus, if he existed, were called Nazarene.

BO XIAN
reply to post by Buttonlip

 

Sorry. I've never observed any evidence for that "LOVE, LOVE, LOVE" to see such evidence.

Quite the opposite is relentlessly demonstrated on this thread.

I do not understand your response. I see no evidence of it either, hence my wanting to see it. I am the only one that said I would LOVE LOVE LOVE it. I have no idea what you are trying to say. Are you suggesting I am not sincere? If so, present the evidence and shut me up. Otherwise you make no sense.

windword
Sorry, if you had read the thread, you would know that Josephus and Tacitus have already been discussed. Those sources have been debunked over and over again.

I must disagree. [Bold emphasis is mine].
From Robert Webb:
"The TF reference to Jesus as a worker of wonders has been regarded as authenticated by consensus of scholars for over 40 years now since Schlomo Pines published the translation of the Agapian text regarded as unpolluted by later interpolations and accurate to the original text by Josephus. Alice Whealey, in 2008, also published an analysis of the Michael the Syrian text, also regarded as unpolluted and accurate to Josephus original."

reply to post by texastig

Why Josephus’ So-called Testimonium Flavianum Must be Rejected
By Harry H. McCall at 11/29/2008
The acknowledged authority on the life and works of Josephus is Louis H. Feldman of Yeshiva University.

"So, by the account given by Louis Feldman, Christians are not above forgery and lies to give credence to Christianity!"

“We may remark here on the passage in Josephus which has occasioned by far more comment than any other, the so-called Testimonium Flavianum (Ant. XVIII. 63 - 4) concerning Jesus. The passage appears in all our manuscripts; but a considerable number of Christian writers - Pseudo-Justin and Theophilus in the second century, Minucius Felix, Irenaeus, Clement of Alexandria, Julius Africanus, Tertullian, Hippolytus and Orgen in the third century, and Methodius and Pseudo-Eustathius in the early fourth century - who knew Jeosphus and cited from his works do not refer to this passage, though one would imagine that it would be the first passage that a Christian apologist would cite. In particular, Origen (Contra Celsum 1.47 and Commentary on Matthew 10.17), who certainly knew Book 18 of the Antiquities and cites five passages from it, explicitly states that Josephus did not believe in Jesus as Christ. The first to cite the Testimonium is Eusebius (c. 324); and even after him, we may note, there are eleven Christian writers who cite Josephus but not the Testimonium. In fact, it is not until Jerome in the early fifth century that we have another reference to it.
debunkingchristianity.blogspot.com...

A False Witness

Despite the best wishes of sincere believers and the erroneous claims of truculent apologists, the Testimonium Flavianum has been demonstrated continually over the centuries to be a forgery, likely interpolated by Catholic Church historian Eusebius in the fourth century. So thorough and universal has been this debunking that very few scholars of repute continued to cite the passage after the turn of the 19th century. Indeed, the TF was rarely mentioned, except to note that it was a forgery, and numerous books by a variety of authorities over a period of 200 or so years basically took it for granted that the Testimonium Flavianum in its entirety was spurious, an interpolation and a forgery. As Dr. Gordon Stein relates:

"...the vast majority of scholars since the early 1800s have said that this quotation is not by Josephus, but rather is a later Christian insertion in his works. In other words, it is a forgery, rejected by scholars."

The Jesus Forgery: Josephus Untangled