Is there evidence that Jesus Christ existed? Yes, there is.

a reply to: cooperton

Sorry, but this is completely false. There is no evidence Pilate ever wrote such a thing (and if he ever did, it has been lost to history). Pilates very existence was a matter of contention for some time until the Pilate Stone was discovered. By using faulty arguments and sources, you are cheapening the very real (and strong) case for a historical Jesus.

originally posted by: DeadSeraph
a reply to: cooperton

Sorry, but this is completely false. There is no evidence Pilate ever wrote such a thing (and if he ever did, it has been lost to history). Pilates very existence was a matter of contention for some time until the Pilate Stone was discovered. By using faulty arguments and sources, you are cheapening the very real (and strong) case for a historical Jesus.

very strong? of course its very strong. there was an entire movement after the gospels which describes the acts of his apostles. Regardless of the authenticity of the other sources I presented, acts of the apostles is enough proof that Jesus was real (if he wasn't real they would not have devoted their life to him).

originally posted by: windword

Here's another web site that declares these documents to be inauthentic, that won't let me cut and paste. www.ftarchives.net...

Your link claims that the library of congress does not have the record. they do. its called "Jesus before Pilate, a monograph of the crucifixion...", 'pilates letter to tiberius caesar' does not appear as the title so I can see how this was confusing, you just had to search book content rather than title. Whether this book is authentic, who knows. Does some chauvinistic blogger have the right to claim authenticity? Is anything authentic?

This is the whole point of Christianity, it is an internal feeling you know to be authentic because you can match it to the Word of God incarnate. Just because the truth is so unbelievably awesome does not mean it is not true.

a reply to: cooperton

Just because the truth is so unbelievably awesome does not mean it is not true.

If you believe it, then you must also reason that belief in Jesus Christ is a matter of faith, not fact; and, that that's just the way the biblical god and Jesus must have wanted it. Because there is no valid evidence that any of the Bible stories are true.

a reply to: windword

The Munich Talmud was written hundreds of years after the, so called, fact. It is NOT concrete evidence of one Jesus Nazareth. All the Talmuds have been censored and edited by Christians.

Of course the completed Talmud was written after their events. You do understand that some are commentaries of events so naturally the commentaries had to be after the events. Common sense?? To say all editions of Talmuds were censored by Christians is utterly fantastically false.

Mishnah of the Talmud actually was taught by two schools in the days of Jesus and long before. The school of Shammai and the school of Hillel. Saul of Tarsus actually was taught in the school of Hillel and and his master Hillel, who was the president of the Sanhedrin, appointed Saul of Tarsus to membership of the Sanhedrin. Jesus sat in trial under Saul.

Mishnah and Gemara became compiled in writing (Hebrew and Aramaic) in the era of 70 CE as Jerusalem was sacked and slaughtered and was well assembled by 217 CE. To say that all editions of Talmud were censored is ridiculous and if not a lie is false to say the least. You do understand that Torah is but a a part of Talmud or perhaps that also was censored by Christians. Hummm? Please don't feed misinformation. I realize that is your banner but it is a very bad habit that you have.

a reply to: Seede

Of course the completed Talmud was written after their events. You do understand that some are commentaries of events so naturally the commentaries had to be after the events. Common sense?? To say all editions of Talmuds were censored by Christians is utterly fantastically false.

It's a well known fact that the Talmuds were censored and edited, besides the fact that the earliest copy of the Munich Talmud dates hundreds of years later, and can't be legitimately deemed as evidence of Jesus of Nazareth. It's not contemporary or the least bit compelling as evidence of an historical Jesus Christ.

Saul of Tarsus actually was taught in the school of Hillel and and his master Hillel, who was the president of the Sanhedrin, appointed Saul of Tarsus to membership of the Sanhedrin.

LIES! Hillel the Elder died in 10 AD. besides, many of the sayings credited to Jesus were uttered by Hillel, a real historic person, first, like the Golden Rule, for example.

Jesus sat in trial under Saul.

More BS lies! Saul of Tarsus didn't have anything to do with any trial of any Jesus, nor did he attend his crucifixion, if Jesus of Nazareth even existed at all.

The biblical narratives are rife with irreconcilable problems with the arrest and trial of Jesus that completely go against the Sanhedrin laws of capital trials of the day.

I'm tired of your lies and childish personal character attacks. You've proven nothing except how desperate you are to prove your fairy tales to be true. You present lies, exaggerations, false data. You've lost all credibility in my book.

a reply to: DeadSeraph

Thanks for the info.

Although many won't actually read what you wrote I did and appreciate it.

a reply to: windword

If you believe it, then you must also reason that belief in Jesus Christ is a matter of faith, not fact; and, that that's just the way the biblical god and Jesus must have wanted it.

That is the first and maybe the last sensible thing you have ever typed. Of course it is belief. It is called theology and that is the nature of this forum. You may want to try another forum for your secular Humanistic facts.

a reply to: Seede

Get over yourself. That's the premise I always start with. Belief in Jesus Christ is all about faith, not fact.

Believe what you want. But as soon as you believers start asserting that your beliefs are historic facts, and anyone who disagrees is a "god hater" ..............blah blah blah..........you're going to get feedback from me.

If "God and Jesus" wanted Bible stories to be believed, there would be indisputable proof. But there isn't any, at all.

a reply to: windword

LIES! Hillel the Elder died in 10 AD. besides, many of the sayings credited to Jesus were uttered by Hillel, a real historic person, first, like the Golden Rule, for example.

Your hate is showing once again. You do have a problem in understanding what is written but will try to explain what you cannot understand. I never mentioned Hillel the elder. You did, as usual. Biblical Scholars refer to Gamaliel, grandson of Hillel, as "The master of the school of Hillel. In reference to Gamaliel is to say Hillel and it is used in many explanations of the teachings of Hillel. As Gamaliel sat upon Sanhedrin he was Hillel or the philosophy of Hillel. He was not of Gamaliel but was of Hillel. Being the grandson it cannot be said ben Gamaliel for he was the grandson of Hillel. The school of Hillel was chosen over that of Shammai and for this it is regarded as the Sanhedrin of Hillel and not the Sanhedrin of Gamaliel.

This is what I wrote
"Saul of Tarsus actually was taught in the school of Hillel and and his master Hillel, who was the president of the Sanhedrin, appointed Saul of Tarsus to membership of the Sanhedrin."

This is the what should have been written for your mind.
"Saul of Tarsus actually was taught in the school of Hillel and and his master of Hillel, who was the president of the Sanhedrin, appointed Saul of Tarsus to membership of the Sanhedrin."

It's a well known fact that the Talmuds were censored and edited, besides the fact that the earliest copy of the Munich Talmud dates hundreds of years later, and can't be legitimately deemed as evidence of Jesus of Nazareth. It's not contemporary or the least bit compelling as evidence of an historical Jesus Christ.

This again was not the issue. You said "All Talmuds" were censored by Christians. You did not understand nor still do not understand that before Jesus the Mishnah was taught. Mishnah is only one portion of Talmud and to say that it was Christian influenced or censored is not true. Especially when Christianity nor Jesus was known at that time. You simply don't know what you are talking about. The oral law was in practice up to about 70 CE and was taught in conjunction with written Torah. In fact written Torah cannot be fully understood without Mishnah. The complete Talmud (whether first we do not know) is known in 217 CE and Christianity had no influence upon it whatsoever.

You are inferring to this forum that the Christians changed ALL Talmuds to suit Christianity (whatever that was) and it is simply wrong and disingenuous to mislead people. I know your tactics very well and I know how you try to avoid subject matter. You never address an issue when you are totally wrong and try to circumvent that issue with diversion. You are not honest by any means and your hateful name calling will not make a lie the truth.

a reply to: Seede

There is no evidence that Saul was appointed to the Sanhedrin. The Acts of the Apostles as well as Luke are historically inaccurate and therefore not reliable.

Saul of Tarsus never met Hillel, never studied under Hillel.

The Bible takes many of the indisputable recorded words of Hillel and puts them in Jesus' mouth!

The Munich Talmud IS NOT evidence that Jesus Christ existed.

The Jewish Encyclopedia admits that legends concerning Jesus are found in the Talmud ,Midrash and Toledot Yeshu. The Talmud stories , written from a medieval Jewish perspective are slanted to show Jesus in a negative light, in the same fashion that the Gospels are written/rewritten with a slant favorable to the Roman Church / The Vatican.
www.geocities.ws...

a reply to: windword

By nature, iconoclasts seek iconoclasm. You can google either side of any argument and be able to come up with "sources" that support your claim. In my opinion, martyrs in the early 1st millenium who died for Christianity authenticate anything more so than random internet pages. I'm done here.

originally posted by: Seede
a reply to: windword

If you believe it, then you must also reason that belief in Jesus Christ is a matter of faith, not fact; and, that that's just the way the biblical god and Jesus must have wanted it.

That is the first and maybe the last sensible thing you have ever typed. Of course it is belief. It is called theology and that is the nature of this forum. You may want to try another forum for your secular Humanistic facts.

The inherent contradiction in secular humanism is that it enshrines an ideal of "humanity". But in reality, anything I choose to do is "human", no matter how depraved or altruistic. Modern humanism would have you believe some things are more "human" than others.

But don't try to argue this with them, philosophical discussion is not their domain. Their province is the art of buzzwords, slander of opponents, and populist oversimplification.

a reply to: cooperton

In my opinion, martyrs in the early 1st millenium who died for Christianity authenticate anything more so than random internet pages.

What first century Christian martyrs?

Romans were killing Jews without distinction. Any 1st century Christian cult wasn't on the Roman's radar. The Romans crucified 6000 Jewish men outside the city walls of Jerusalem during the Siege of Jerusalem, (69-70AD)....and I can assure you, they didn't ask if their victims were Jews or Christians.

Claudius expelled the Jews, not Christians. After "Nero's Fire", the Jews were taxed, not Christians.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: cooperton

In my opinion, martyrs in the early 1st millenium who died for Christianity authenticate anything more so than random internet pages.

What first century Christian martyrs?

Romans were killing Jews without distinction. Any 1st century Christian cult wasn't on the Roman's radar. The Romans crucified 6000 Jewish men outside the city walls of Jerusalem during the Siege of Jerusalem, (69-70AD)....and I can assure you, they didn't ask if their victims were Jews or Christians.

Claudius expelled the Jews, not Christians. After "Nero's Fire", the Jews were taxed, not Christians.

The Christians left Jerusalem and the Roman province Judea before the Siege of Jerusalem, because Jesus Christ had told them to do so.

Luke 21:20 "when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then recognize that her desolation is near. "Then those who are in Judea must flee to the mountains, and those who are in the midst of the city must leave, and those who are in the country must not enter the city"

a reply to: Ove38

Hopefully, they heeded the warnings! Hopefully, they didn't run to Pompeii or that surrounding countryside!

There were also hold outs, that weren't Christian, but another esoteric Jewish sect, that hid out at Masada. But they also realized their own demise. They refused to be martyred or captured and died in a mass suicide.

originally posted by: cooperton
a reply to: windword

In my opinion, martyrs in the early 1st millenium who died for Christianity authenticate anything more so than random internet pages. I'm done here.

Good point. Thats the same reasoning I used when I gave up all of my Earthly possessions and joined Heavens Gate. I have no doubt my spaceship will arrive to save me just the same as Jesus will you.

Heaven's Gate was an American UFO religious Millenarian group based in San Diego, California, founded in the early 1970s and led by Marshall Applewhite (1931–1997) and Bonnie Nettles (1927–1985).[1] On March 26, 1997, police discovered the bodies of 39 members of the group who had committed mass suicide[2] in order to reach what they believed was an alien space craft following Comet Hale–Bopp.

There are many groups, many peoples who literally have given their lives for nonsensical bs. People are stupid. Just not people who believe in talking snakes and guys living in whales stomachs.

a reply to: peter vlar

Very good post. The bottom line is "God" is the greatest lie ever told for the benefit of what amounts to highly organized crime. There were and are no miracles. None. A scam on the highest order using lies and deception destroying and hiding anything that would expose real history. "Missionaries" even destroyed American native Indian totem poles in the NW because they thought they may have had religious significance, they told history and the culture.

Seriously pathic how low Christianity stooped for pure power and greed. And some people use blinders to ignore the simple truth. Again, very good post.

Denny

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance
That isn't evidence of Jesus' existence, at least not as the supernatural, 'son of god' that Christians believe in. Christus was a title, not a name, and was given to many people, and 'Jesus' (actually Yeshua) was one of the most (if not the most) common male names in that area in and around the first century. Nice try, but no....

There should be no doubt Jesus was a historical person. There is a wide consensus that Jesus did indeed live. The question is rather: What of what we are told about him is false; or: How are these stories meant to be understood?

I'm sure some of the below has already come up in this thread, but perhaps not in the same manner.

Jesus Christ—Evidence That He Walked the Earth

DO YOU believe in the existence of the man named Albert Einstein? You may readily answer yes, but why? Most people have not personally met him. Yet, reliable reports of his accomplishments prove that he did exist. The influence of his existence is felt through scientific applications of his discoveries. For instance, many benefit from electricity generated by nuclear energy, the release of which is closely linked with the application of Einstein’s famous equation, E=mc2 (energy equals mass times the speed of light squared).

The same reasoning applies to Jesus Christ, admittedly the most influential man in history. What was written about him and the visible evidence of the influence he wielded prove beyond doubt that he did exist. As interesting as the recent archaeological finding of the James inscription, described in the preceding article, may be, Jesus’ historicity does not depend on this or any other artifact. The fact is, we can find evidence of Jesus’ existence in what secular historians wrote about him and his followers.

Testimony of Historians

For instance, consider the testimony of Flavius Josephus, a first-century Jewish historian who was a Pharisee. He referred to Jesus Christ in the book Jewish Antiquities. Although some doubt the authenticity of the first reference where Josephus mentioned Jesus as the Messiah, Professor Louis H. Feldman of Yeshiva University says that few have doubted the genuineness of the second reference. There Josephus said: “[Ananus the high priest] convened the judges of the Sanhedrin and brought before them a man named James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ.” (Jewish Antiquities, XX, 200) Yes, a Pharisee, a member of the sect many of whose adherents were avowed enemies of Jesus, acknowledged the existence of “James, the brother of Jesus.”

The influence of Jesus’ existence was felt through the activities of his followers. When the apostle Paul was imprisoned in Rome about 59 C.E., the principal men of the Jews told him: “As regards this sect it is known to us that everywhere it is spoken against.” (Acts 28:17-22) They called Jesus’ disciples “this sect.” If they were everywhere spoken against, secular historians would likely report about them, would they not?

Tacitus, born about 55 C.E. and considered one of the world’s greatest historians, mentioned the Christians in his Annals. In the account about Nero’s blaming the great fire of Rome in 64 C.E. on them, he wrote: “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.” The details of this account match the information regarding the Jesus of the Bible.

Another writer who commented on Jesus’ followers was Pliny the Younger, the governor of Bithynia. In about the year 111 C.E., Pliny wrote to Emperor Trajan, asking how to handle Christians. People who were falsely accused of being Christians, wrote Pliny, would repeat an invocation to the gods and worship the statue of Trajan, just to prove that they were not Christians. Pliny continued: “There is no forcing, it is said, those who are really Christians, into any of these compliances.” That testifies to the reality of the existence of the Christ, whose followers were prepared to give their lives for their belief in him.

After summarizing the references to Jesus Christ and his followers by the historians of the first two centuries, The Encyclopædia Britannica (2002 edition) concludes: “These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries.”

Testimony of Jesus’ Followers

“The New Testament supplies nearly all the evidence for a historical reconstruction of Jesus’ life and fate and for the earliest Christian interpretations of his significance,” says The Encyclopedia Americana. Skeptics may not accept the Bible as evidence of Jesus’ existence. Yet, two lines of reasoning based on Scriptural accounts particularly help to establish that Jesus actually walked the earth.

As we noted, Einstein’s great theories prove his existence. Similarly, Jesus’ teachings prove the reality of his existence. Take for example the Sermon on the Mount, a well-known discourse that Jesus gave. (Matthew, chapters 5-7) The apostle Matthew wrote of the impact of that sermon: “The crowds were astounded at his way of teaching; for he was teaching them as a person having authority.” (Matthew 7:28, 29) Regarding the effect the sermon has had on people over the centuries, Professor Hans Dieter Betz noted: “The influences exerted by the Sermon on the Mount generally far transcend the borderlines of Judaism and Christianity, or even Western culture.” He added that this sermon has “a peculiarly universalistic appeal.”

Consider the following concise and practical words of wisdom found in the Sermon on the Mount: “Whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other also to him.” “Take good care not to practice your righteousness in front of men.” “Never be anxious about the next day, for the next day will have its own anxieties.” “Do not . . . throw your pearls before swine.” “Keep on asking, and it will be given you.” “All things . . . that you want men to do to you, you also must likewise do to them.” “Go in through the narrow gate.” “By their fruits you will recognize them.” “Every good tree produces fine fruit.”—Matthew 5:39; 6:1, 34; 7:6, 7, 12, 13, 16, 17.

No doubt you have heard some of these expressions or the gist of them. Perhaps they have become proverbs in your language. These are all taken from the Sermon on the Mount. The influence that this sermon has on many peoples and cultures eloquently testifies to the existence of “the great teacher.”

Let us imagine that someone fabricated a figure called Jesus Christ. Suppose that person was clever enough to come up with the teachings credited to Jesus in the Bible. Would he not contrive to make Jesus and his teachings as palatable as possible to people in general? Yet, the apostle Paul observed: “Both the Jews ask for signs and the Greeks look for wisdom; but we preach Christ impaled, to the Jews a cause for stumbling but to the nations foolishness.” (1 Corinthians 1:22, 23) The message of Christ impaled was attractive neither to the Jews nor to the nations. That was, though, the Christ that first-century Christians proclaimed. Why the depiction of the Christ impaled? The only satisfactory explanation would be that the writers of the Christian Greek Scriptures recorded the truth about Jesus’ life and death.

Another line of reasoning supporting Jesus’ historicity is found in the untiring preaching of his teachings by his followers. ...

a reply to: whereislogic

Let us imagine that someone fabricated a figure called Jesus Christ.

"Somebody" certainly did, as there was never a man named Jesus Christ that walked the earth. "Christ" is the designated deification that Jesus of Nazareth, supposedly, received after he was said to have risen from the dead.

There is absolutely no contemporary evidence that Jesus of Nazareth ever really existed.