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

a reply to: Akragon

Do you agree the number non Christian scholars in denial is far
out numbered by non Christian scholars in opposition to such denials?

Forgive me if I'm not being clear AK?

originally posted by: randyvs
a reply to: Akragon

Do you agree the number non Christian scholars in denial is far
out numbered by non Christian schalars in opposition to such denials?

Forgive me if I'm not being clear AK?

not at all...

Devils advocate i suppose..

a reply to: windword

Early Christian Father Origen argued with Greek philosopher Celsus on the existence of Jesus Christ, in his famous writing "Against/Contra Celsus".

Contra Celsus is the earliest known comprehensive attack on Christianity, which rebuted by Origen. There was not an Argument about the existence of Jesus as a Person. The 2 Major Points of this attack were :

1. Celsus wrote that some Jews said Jesus' father was a Roman soldier named Pantera.

2. Celsus addressed the miracles of Jesus, holding that "Jesus performed His miracles by charming (γοητεία)

There is no proof that Jesus of Nazareth ever really existed, and certainly the person depicted in the Bible, being born of a virgin, performing miracles and rising from the dead, never existed.

The majority of scholars do not deny the existence of Jesus as a Person since there is plenty evidence that He existed. The only debate that rages still, is whether He was who He said was, and all the miracles that been atrributed to Him.

In short the existence of Jesus as a person is a fact. The divinity of Jesus is a matter of faith.

Peace

a reply to: Seed76

The majority of scholars do not deny the existence of Jesus as a Person since there is plenty evidence that He existed.

Most definitely believe Jesus existed

the main problem is the lack of First century texts, or fragments...

Theres nothing from anywhere close to when he actually lived... but theres plenty of texts that survived from the first century...

Just nothing speaking of him...

originally posted by: Entreri06

originally posted by: ParasuvO
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

How do you safely reconcile yourself in the knowledge that beliefs are interchangeable and can be altered at will, within such a supposed strict framework of TRUTH.

This is already a partial admittance that ALL CHRISTIANS are in religious cults, DESPITE the fact that lately they are teaching the flocks to claim, I AM NOT RELIGIOUS, LOL.

I think the funniest part is the way Christian doctrine is always" right" no matter how much the fundamental known nature has changed.... If the biblical account was actually the TRUTH , shouldn't it have been the church who revealed the nature of
The universe.

If Jesus was really the son of God (and a real person, not an amalagramation like with king author) then wouldn't the whole round earth and expanding universe of amazingness be worth mentioning. Hell any normal person would lead with that, then get to the whole save your soul stuff.

Just the very first verse..
8mins


Then on to salvation just as you expressed and expected it should be..
2mins

a reply to: Seed76

In short the existence of Jesus as a person is a fact.

No, it most certainly is not a fact. There is no evidence, outside of the Bible, that Jesus of Nazareth existed, and even the Bible is written decades and centuries after the advent and contains no contemporary evidence. Every piece of so called evidence is riddled with supposition. None of if validates biblical stories.

There is no way to connect the existence of one Jesus of Nazareth without the biblical myth being attached. At the very least we must look at the root, of whether this person existed, starting with his supposed miraculous birth. We must trace the rumors of a man walking on water and feeding 5000 followers from almost nothing. We must trace the remains of a city called Nazareth, yet archeological remains leave us hold an empty bag of hopeful supposition that Nazareth was an inhabited and thriving city in the 1st century! It most certainly was not.

I'm sorry, but no, there is no concrete evidence that Jesus of Nazareth, the man of the biblical myth ever existed.

www.jesusneverexisted.com...

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Letters are NOT evidence. Evidence is physical, objective and FIRST HAND. Letters, while physical, are neither objective or firsthand. Jesus is a myth.

a reply to: richapau
It really does sound like people here are taking their arguments straight from the Atheist Experience Show (or whoever they were parroting). The exact same unthoughtful terminologies: "pious forgeries" and "letters" to downplay the value* of the sources or quickly skip past the most valuable* ones and complain about something (in this case "letters") not being good enough for ye, in essence. While they're good enough for historians to base their teachings around that are given in the more advanced history classes at universities when these subjects come up. Who are you to say that "letters are NOT evidence"? Such statements have no value in serious discussions about the methodology of reconstructing history that are in use by historians with some training, education, experience and/or degrees in that field. *: value in terms of determining the (historical) facts of the matter, the truth of the matter.

From wikipedia about "the Annals" (not mere letters):

The Annals (Latin: Annales) by Roman historian and senator Tacitus[1] is a history of the Roman Empire from the reign of Tiberius to that of Nero, the years AD 14–68.[2] The Annals are an important source to modern understanding of the history of the Roman Empire during the first century;[3] it is Tacitus' final work, and modern historians generally consider it his greatest writing.[4] Historian Ronald Mellor calls it "Tacitus's crowning achievement" which represents the "pinnacle of Roman historical writing".[5]

Tacitus' Histories and Annals together amounted to 30 books...
Modern scholars believe that as a Roman senator, Tacitus had access to Acta Senatus—the Roman senate's records—which provided a solid basis for his work.[4] ... The name of the current manuscript seems to be "Books of History from the Death of the Divine Augustus" (Ab Excessu divi Augusti Historiarum Libri).
...
The Annals was Tacitus' final work and provides a key source for modern understanding of the history of the Roman Empire from the beginning of the reign of Tiberius in AD 14 to the end of the reign of Nero, in AD 68.[3]

As earlier mentioned in my first comment in this thread:

Tacitus, born about 55 C.E. and considered one of the world’s greatest historians,...

Similar things are said about the Jewish historian Josephus, who was born about 37 C.E. according to wikipedia. Perhaps someone wants the masses to forget about history so that people can't learn from history and are more easily kept in the dark and molded according to a set of patterns to keep them ignorant and apathic about specific history. Perhaps that's why some people like to debate whether or not the field of history is a field of science (which is not an invitation to do so)?

If you're getting bored with this particular subject, this article might be of interest for some addtional information about how things are done in the field of history:

Ancient Manuscripts—How Are They Dated? Awake!—2008

originally posted by: richapau
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Letters are NOT evidence. Evidence is physical, objective and FIRST HAND. Letters, while physical, are neither objective or firsthand. Jesus is a myth.

Posted September 22, 2017 AD

the secularists even want to try to destroy this history by referring to it as CE, yet our entire calendar system is still centered around the coming of Jesus.

Letters would be good evidence. But we don't have any from Jesus, nor any first person contemporary source. Robin Hood has far less evidence for his existence than Jesus, but it's far better quality and there isn't a whole mass of supernatural nonsense to sort through. His existence is more plausible.

Where believers are concerned, the relevant part is that jesus as portrayed in the Gospels is overwhelmingly rejected by mainstream historians. He didn't exist. Though many of them (certainly not all) feel there was probably a real person who existed and formed the seed of the later mythology and stories.

Overwhelmingly when people trot out their appeal to numbers fallacy, the relevant "academics" in this field that they are referring to (religious scholars/historians) are Christians who rely on the existence of jesus for their salvation (and quite often have no formal qualifications as historians, unlike secular historians). Go figure.


Not sure about this 2017 Common Era nonsense either lol.

MMDCCLXX AUC.

Daniels prophesy of 70 weeks of years could only apply to one person in history, and it was.

originally posted by: Akragon
...
Just nothing speaking of him...

There is just about an exact amount of evidence that Pontius Pilatus existed. Not to mention the fact that most of what we know about famous ancient people like Alexander the Great are writings made hundreds of years after his death. Jesus was not regarded as famous by Roman historians, and he was murdered as a criminal. The Romans during that time wouldn't have made coins and statues of him.

a reply to: Cogito, Ergo Sum

Nope, wrong again but like always atheists rather believe it was all a fairy tale. Most of these historians back then had other written accounts that they used for their own accounts. Most of what we have written by Thalus, another historian, is in fragments, and most of his writings are forever lost. One of the things he wrote about, apart from the day of Jesus crucifixion, was a three volume history of the Mediterranean until the 167th Olimpiad, which would have been around 112 BC and he was alive around 52AD. I am guessing you want to discount anything and everything that we have left that Thalus himself wrote?...

Most historians, like Thalus, had access to history books and accounts that no longer exist anymore. Just because they write about something that happened earlier, 20-30 years if we are talking about Thalus, it doesn't mean their works don't count and can't be accepted as evidence...

Otherwise are you willing to discount any and every ancient text that historians wrote but they didn't witness and occurred years to decades or even hundreds of years before they existed?...

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

The whole point of God and Christ... is the message; that all is new in Christ.

It is about being present with what is present.

Only what is present exists but dragging a dead image into this space will only ever bring conflict.....

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

There is also a letter from Pilate to Caesar after the death of Jesus where he gives full account of his actions and why he had him crucified even though he could find him guilty of no wrong doing worthy of any death sentence. But what is even more remarkable is how he tells of the miracles he was told of during Jesus life and those he felt he witnessed himself during his scourging and during his time on the cross as well as the account by his soldiers sent to guard his tomb. Then his last sentence the most profound as he proclaims surely this man was the son of God...

Double Trouble

originally posted by: 5StarOracle
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

There is also a letter from Pilate to Caesar after the death of Jesus where he gives full account of his actions and why he had him crucified even though he could find him guilty of no wrong doing worthy of any death sentence. But what is even more remarkable is how he tells of the miracles he was told of during Jesus life and those he felt he witnessed himself during his scourging and during his time on the cross as well as the account by his soldiers sent to guard his tomb. Then his last sentence the most profound as he proclaims surely this man was the son of God...

yeah, about that letter...

1. Letter of Pilate to Tiberius - Unable to verify by finding an image of the original Greek manuscript

2. Letter from Pontius Pilate to Tiberius Caesar - mentions Copies are in the Congressional Library in Washington, D.C. but initial searches reveal nothing, and some sites say mention:
"The Library of Congress has received a number of inquiries over the years about a purported letter from Pontius Pilate to Tiberius Caesar concerning Jesus Christ. The Library does not have such a letter in its collections".

3. Fraud by Pilate Letter - although this seems to be claiming the letter is false (I google translated it), the text of this letter is unique from the other two. This also mentions a fiction book, Letters of Pontius Pilate, published in 1928 which may be the basis for many of the supposed letters that mention Jesus

4. Historic Letter written by Pontius Pilate to Tiberius Caesar - mentioned in OP question mentions it is in the British Museum but searches on that site and of the British Museum Library reveal nothing

I've found a supposed response from the British Museum

"There are no surviving original letters by Herod or Pontius Pilate, to each other or to anyone else. Any manuscripts of them which do exist are forgeries or much later copies. A Syriac MS in the British Library Oriental Collections (reference number Add. 14609) contains a 6th or 7th Century copy of the letters. Here is the catalogue description of the MS:

THE DOCTRINE Of St. Peter;-The life of St. Anthony, by St. Athan- asius;-Account of the Monks in Egypt;-Life of Serapion;- Letter of Herod to Pilate, and of Pilate to Herod;-The Recogni- tions of St. Clement. On vellum, of the vith or viith century. Quarto. [14,609.]

There are many modern texts and English translations of the letters, including the one on the website link you gave.

I hope this helps.

Yours sincerely,

Zoë Stansell

MSS Enquiries"

It's printed in The Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. 8. Edited by Alexander Roberts, James Donaldson, and A. Cleveland Coxe. (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1916.) It's public domain; you can download it from Internet Archive. "Pilate's letter" may have been published earlier than the Ante-Nicene Fathers set, but this edition has the benefit of showing scholarly opinion on the matter - which is what we need here.

You'd think the inclusion of the letter of Pilate would give it the credentials of authenticity, but no - the letter is placed under the heading of Apocryphal Gospels. In the introductory notice to the Apocryphal Gospels, the translator writes: "The text is formed from four authorities, none of them ancient." (p. 353) So even in the late 1800s-early 1900s scholars doubted the authenticity of the letter, if they didn't reject it outright.

christianity.stackexchange.com...

I think that Jesus of Nazareth is an copy of an idea of perfection. The idea has been copied so many times, so it has distorted the idea. People who are obsessed with scripture words and rituals too much, have mostly lost the path to follow that idea. They should concentrate on the direct connection with life. The personal connection with life is connection with god in it's purest form. Concentrating too much on other people's words and rituals will distract that connection.

originally posted by: Herolotus
THIS IS INFURIATING.

I am an educated historian specializing in this exact era and place, and I can assure you...

THERE IS ZERO EVIDENCE THIS MAN LIVED

I worked in the reconstruction of the 2nd oldest Christian Church ever discovered (In Jordan).

No Historian, NO HISTORIAN, would look at your examples as valid. The Greek 'Christos', is simply a word. The sources you cite do not in any way prove anything.

A message to all 'Christians'. Stop attempting to use 'science' or 'research' to prove the existence of your diety. It is an insult to faith, it is an insult to the religion, it is an incredible insult to historical research and study.

Herolutus, your response was from years ago, but if you are still around, I would be very interested in hearing more detail from a real historian's perspective on some of the issues raised here and your own research. First, what did you find in the 2nd oldest Christian church in Jordan? Did you find out anything about early Christian beliefs for example?

2nd, what are your thoughts on the Tacitus quote and why? Is the Tacitus reference authentic (ie not a forgery)? If we were to assume it is authentic (for sake of argument), why (from a historical perspective) do you dismiss it?

Lastly, what are your thoughts on the expulsion of Jews from Rome by Claudius (in office 41-54AD) supposedly due to this Chrestus character's instigation? Is there any historical information on Chrestus? What in your opinion, was that all about?

Thanks! (if you happen to still be around)

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: DeadSeraph


Here's another Jesus like charactor from Josephus.

According to Flavius Josephus, there were many people during the governorship of Festus

who deceived and deluded the people under pretense of Divine inspiration, but were in fact for procuring innovations and changes of the government. These men prevailed with the multitude to act like madmen, and went before them into the wilderness, pretending that God would there show them the signals of liberty.
[Flavius Josephus, Jewish War 2.259]
He continues with the following story.

There was an Egyptian false prophet that did the Jews more mischief than the former; for he was a cheat, and pretended to be a prophet also, and got together thirty thousand men that were deluded by him; these he led round about from the wilderness to the mount which was called the Mount of Olives. He was ready to break into Jerusalem by force from that place; and if he could but once conquer the Roman garrison and the people, he intended to rule them by the assistance of those guards of his that were to break into the city with him.
[Flavius Josephus, Jewish War 2.261-262]


[Flavius Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 20.169-171]

30,000 men that were deluded by him! Those are epic numbers of "biblical" proportions!

There is an author historian named Lena Einhorn who wrote a book called "A Shift in Time: How Historical Documents Reveal the Surprising Truth about Jesus." Her theory is that this "Egyptian" is actually Jesus. There are also some other scholars around who have written similar books that pretty much said the same thing, that this Egyptian is, low and behold, Jesus. She notes some parallels, like hanging out on the Mt of Olives, how the Gospels say that the disciples were armed with swords and tried to fight when Jesus was arrested, the gospels reference Jesus spending a lot of time in Egypt, etc. She adds the spin that if you shift the times (Jesus died in the 50s AD instead of 33), you can get everything to line up with the gospels. At least this is more plausible than those silly forged Josephus quotes that everyone throws around. And no one has tried to say that these were forged or inserted into Josephus.

So there you have it folks, indisputable documented evidence that Jesus existed, case closed!

Well... there are a couple of "little" problems with this theory. For one, this "Jesus" was never crucified or rose from the dead. Actually he got away and was never captured. Could it be that the Muslims got it right? They say Jesus escaped the crucifixion and someone else was crucified in his place. That would leave Jesus free to get back together with Mary Magdelene, move to France (or England depending on which story you believe), and have kids who would become kings and sponsor the Devinci code. But then what does that say about all the other "evidence" that says he was crucified under Pontius Pilate? Not to mention Paul and the entire Christian faith. Unless the "fake" crucified Jesus fooled everyone except the Muslims. Only problem is, they won't exist for another 600 years. Oh well, Lena Einhorn gives you the historical Jesus, but I guess you can't expect her to give you everything.