Proof that Jesus was real

cfmin.wordpress.com...

The ancient historical record provides examples of writers, philosophers and historians who lived during or not long after the time Jesus is believed to have lived and who testify to the fact that he was a real person. We will look at what some of these people have said.

Cornelius Tacitus
Tacitus lived from A.D. 55 to A.D. 120. He was a Roman historian and has been described as the greatest historian of Rome, noted for his integrity and moral uprightness. His most famous works are the Annals and the Histories. The Annals relate the historical narrative from Augustus’ death in A.D.14 to Nero’s death in A.D. 68. The Histories begin their narrative after Nero’s death and finish with Domitian’s death in A.D. 96. In his section describing Nero’s decision to blame the fire of Rome on the Christians, Tacitus affirms that the founder of Christianity, a man he calls Chrestus (a common misspelling of Christ, which was Jesus’ surname), was executed by Pilate, the procurator of Judea during the reign of the Roman emperor Tiberias. Tacitus was hostile to Christianity because in the same paragraph he describes Christus’ or Christ’s death, he describes Christianity as a pernicious superstition. It would have therefore been in his interests to declare that Jesus had never existed, but he did not, and perhaps he did not because he could not without betraying the historical record.

Mod Edit: New External Source Tags – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 4-12-2008 by GAOTU789]

If this doesn't prove it for you then nothing will. How can so many people from different backgrounds produce all of this evidence if the man wasn't real?

Gday,

Well, I have actually checked this evidence, here is what I found :


JOSEPHUS (c.96CE)

The famous Testamonium Flavianum (the T.F.) in the Antiquities of the Jews is considered probably the best evidence for Jesus, yet it has some serious problems :
* the T.F. as it stands uses clearly Christian phrases and names Christ as Messiah, it could not possibly have been written by the devout Jew Josephus (who remained a Jew and refused to call anyone "messiah" in his book which was partly about how false messiahs kept leading Israel astray.),
* The T.F. was not mentioned by any of the early Church fathers who reviewed Josephus.
* Origen even says Josephus does NOT call Jesus the Messiah, showing the passage was not present c.200CE.
* The T.F. first showed up in manuscripts of Eusebius, and was still absent from some manuscripts as late as 8th century.
* The other tiny passage in Josephus refers to Jesus, son of Damneus. The phrase "so-called Christ" may have been a later addition by a Christian who also mis-understood which Jesus was refered to.

An analysis of Josephus can be found here:
www.humanists.net...

In short - this passage is possibly a total forgery (or at best a corrupt form of a lost original.)
But, yes,
it COULD just be actual evidence for Jesus - late, corrupt, controversial but just POSSIBLY real historical evidence.


TACITUS (c.112CE)

Roughly 80 years after the alleged events (and 40 years after the war) Tacitus allegedly wrote a (now) famous passage about "Christ" - this passage has several problems however:
* Tacitus uses the term "procurator", used in his later times, but not correct for the actual period, when "prefect" was used.
* Tacitus names the person as "Christ", when Roman records could not possibly have used this name (it would have been "Jesus, son of Joseph" or similar.)
* This passage is paraphrased by Sulpicius Severus in the 5th century without attributing it to Tacitus, and may have been inserted back into Tacitus from this work.

This evidence speaks AGAINST it being based on any Roman records -
but
merely a few details which Tacitus gathered from Christian stories circulating in his time (c.f. Pliny.)
So,
this passage is NOT evidence for Jesus,
it's just evidence for 2nd century Christian stories about Jesus.


PLINY the Younger (c.112CE)

About 80 years after the alleged events, (and over 40 years after the war) Pliny referred to Christians who worshipped a "Christ" as a god, but there is no reference to a historical Jesus or Gospel events.
So,
Pliny is not evidence for a historical Jesus of Nazareth,
just evidence for 2nd century Christians who worshipped a Christ.
www.earlychristianwritings.com...


SUETONIUS (c.115CE)

Roughly 80-90 years after the alleged Gospel events, (about 75 years after the war) Suetonius refers to a "Chrestus" who stirred the Jews to trouble in Rome during Claudius' time, but:
* this "Chrestus" is a Greek name (from "useful"), and is also a mystic name for an initiate, it is not the same as "Christos"
* this Chrestus was apparently active in Rome, Jesus never was.
So,
this passage is not evidence for Jesus,
it's nothing to do with Jesus,
it's evidence for Christians grasping at straws.
www.earlychristianwritings.com...

...

...

IGNATIUS (107CE? 130-170CE?)

The letters of Ignatius are traditionally dated to c.107, yet:
* it is not clear if he really existed, his story is suspicious,
* his letters are notoriously corrupt and in 2 versions,
* it is probable that his letters were later forgeries,
* he mentions only a tiny few items about Jesus.
So,
Ignatius is no evidence for Jesus himself,
at BEST it is 2nd century evidence to a few beliefs about Jesus.
www.earlychristianwritings.com...

...


QUADRATUS (c.125CE)

Quadratus apparently wrote an Apology to Hadrian (117-138), but:
* we have none of his works,
* it is not certain when he wrote,
* all we have is 1 sentence quoted much later.
So,
Quadratus is uncertain evidence from about a century later.
www.earlychristianwritings.com...


THALLUS (date unknown)

We have NO certain evidence when Thallus lived or wrote, there are NONE of Thallus' works extant.
What we DO have is a 9th century reference by George Syncellus who quotes the 3rd century Julianus Africanus, who, speaking of the darkness at the crucifixion, wrote: "Thallus calls this darkness an eclipse".
But,
there is NO evidence Thallus made specific reference to Jesus or the Gospel events at all, as there WAS an eclipse in 29. This suggests he merely referred to a known eclipse, but that LATER Christians MIS-interpreted his comment to mean their darkness. (Also note the supposed reference to Thallus in Eusebius is a false reading.)

Richard Carrier the historian has a good page on Thallus:
www.infidels.org...

So,
Thallus is no evidence for Jesus at all,
merely evidence for Christian wishful thinking.


PHLEGON (c.140)

Phlegon wrote during the 140s - his works are lost. Later, Origen, Eusebius, and Julianus Africanus (as quoted by George Syncellus) refer to him, but quote differently his reference to an eclipse. There is no evidence Phlegon actually said anything about Gospel events, he was merely talking about an eclipse (they DO happen) which LATER Christians argued was the "darkness" in their stories.
So,
Phlegon is no evidence for Jesus at all -
merely evidence for Christian wishful thinking.

...

VALENTINUS (c.140CE)

In mid 2nd century the GNOSTIC Valentinus almost became Bishop of Rome, but:
* he was several generations after the alleged events,
* he wrote of an esoteric, Gnostic Jesus and Christ,
* he mentioned no historical details about Jesus.
So,
Valentinus is no evidence for a historical Jesus.
www.earlychristianwritings.com...


POLYCARP (c.155CE)

Polycarp wrote in mid 2nd century, but :
* he is several generations after the alleged events,
* he gives many sayings of Jesus (some of which do NOT match the Gospels),
* he does NOT name any evangelist or Gospel.
So,
Polycarp knew sayings of Jesus,
but provides no actual evidence for a historical Jesus.
www.earlychristianwritings.com...


LUCIAN (c.170CE)

Nearly one-and-a-half CENTURIES after the alleged events, Lucian satirised Christians, but :
* this was several generations later,
* Lucian does NOT even mention Jesus or Christ by name.
So,
Lucian is no evidence for a historical Jesus, merely late 2nd century lampooning of Christians.


GALEN (late 2nd C.)

Late 2nd century, Galen makes a few references to Christians, and briefly to Christ.
This is far too late to be evidence for Jesus.


NUMENIUS (2nd C.?)

In the 3rd century, Origen claimed Numenius "quotes also a narrative regarding Jesus--without, however, mentioning His name" - i.e. Numenius mentioned a story but said nothing about Jesus, but by Origen's time it had become attached to Jesus' name.
This not any evidence for Jesus, it's just later wishful thinking.


TALMUD (3rd C. and later)

There are some possible references in the Talmud, but:
* these references are from 3rd century or later, and seem to be (unfriendly) Jewish responses to Christian claims.
* the references are highly variant, have many cryptic names for Jesus, and very different to the Gospel stories (e.g. one story has "Jesus" born about 100BC.)
So,
the Talmud contains NO evidence for Jesus,
the Talmud merely has much later Jewish responses to the Gospel stories.



MARA BAR SERAPION (date unknown)

A fragment which includes -
"... What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise King?",
in the context of ancient leaders like Socrates.
It is NOT at all clear WHEN this manuscript was written, nor exactly who it is referring too, but there is no evidence it is Jesus.



In short,
* there are no Roman recods of Jesus,
* there is no contemporary evidence for Jesus,
* the claimed evidence is very weak - late, forged, suspect or not about Jesus at all.
* the T.F. is probably the best "evidence", but it is at best corrupt, at worst forged.


K.

Matthew for one, didn't write the Gospel of Matthew....you shouldn't imply he did.

Not that I need proof he existed but decent proof to me that he is, who they say he is was, is based on the 12 cowards who followed him for a couple of years or so...and something happens and 10 of these guys go on to marytr themselves for him. Nobody goes from coward to courageous marytr in that short of time not to mention 10 out of 12. (Judas hung himself so I don't count it, but he must have been upset about something, hmm.) and of course John who was told to take care of Mary...He lived a nice long life. The rest of course faced some miserable deaths. Andrew crucified upside down. Lions for some others...etc.
I look at human nature, tough to fake that.

nice post!!

Jesus' Worldwide Influence

Originally posted by Res Ipsa
Not that I need proof he existed but decent proof to me that he is, who they say he is was, is based on the 12 cowards who followed him for a couple of years or so...and something happens and 10 of these guys go on to marytr themselves for him. ...
I look at human nature, tough to fake that.

And how many folks died for Jim Jones, David Koresh, and Marshall Applewhite? Yeah, I know a little bit about human nature, too.

reply to post by Mozzy


You missed one, the Jewish Talmud clearly states that in 34 A.D. (our time) that Yeshua was hung on a cross on the eve of Passover.

And the Jews kept pretty good records of everything in their writings...

Edit - I forgot some more you missed... The Oracle at Delphi predicted him to the day, another Oracle, I don't recall which also foretold of Jesus and Christianity.

[edit on 12/3/2008 by theindependentjournal]

All I have to say about this is that if these ancient documents are believable..then so are the ancient Mayan and Aztec texts.

Yet those are thrown out as pure nonesense more than anything.

Why is that?

Why are one set of ancient texts believable just because it mentions God or Jesus, and others that do not have any reference to God or Jesus, are not considered valid????



Selective reading and belief is what I call it.


I suppose it was also selective choosing to remove much of the books and chapters from the entire historical record from the bible.



Hmm..



Cheers!!!!!

Their were prob a lot of men called jesus back then, common enough name, but for him to be the son of your god then your god would have to exsist. Really god = nature & the son of god really means the sun of god/nature that the pagans used to worship. the 12 disciples were taken from the 12 months of the year, the cross on a circle represents the sun and the four seasons & on the winter solstice the sun died for 3 days and was born again on the 25th dec which was celebrated with great feasting by the pagans. Ringin any bells for ya? Sorry mate but jesus,god & the like is just a self policing system of control
The only creative wonder is that of nature which is truely awesome

[edit on 3-12-2008 by cropmuncher]

reply to post by RFBurns


Are you suggesting we have all the ancient Mayan and Aztec texts so that we can compare them? I know you can't be that ignorant to think 4 codices POSSIBLY decoded could tel us of their culture. The Spanish burned their writings or we would know more about them maybe...

Now lets look at the Textus Receptus - over 2000 copies from every culture and kingdom passed down over thousands of years and yet not one in any language differs from any of the others in the other hundreds of languages..

Ever play telephone? The message changes by the third person yet the Russian copy of the textus receptus is IDENTICAL to the Jewish Copies and the Indian and the Ethiopian and not one word is out of order. Not bad for a make believe story, as you put it, to keep itself 100% verifiable in hundreds of languages when 4 people in this thread couldn't play telephone without messing the message up. Sounds to m like GOD preserves HIS WORD at his will telephone game or no.

This is NOT disputable, the Textus receptus in all those languages over those years were eventually brought together to create the Authorized King James Version, printed by Gutenberg and later shut down by Rome and the Catholics who use the Alexandrian text only as well as the apocryphal books.

You people act as if there was one copy of these things and not thousands in hundreds of languages and all IDENTICAL as they were.

Originally posted by Nohup

Originally posted by Res Ipsa
Not that I need proof he existed but decent proof to me that he is, who they say he is was, is based on the 12 cowards who followed him for a couple of years or so...and something happens and 10 of these guys go on to marytr themselves for him. ...
I look at human nature, tough to fake that.

And how many folks died for Jim Jones, David Koresh, and Marshall Applewhite? Yeah, I know a little bit about human nature, too.

........................................

I agree, you must know a "little" bit about human nature. Those people drank kool-aid...they commited suicide. They were nothing but cowards and fools...they stuck to their natures....the other guys I mentioned, flipped the script and went out to do what they did at great risk and when faced with certain painful death....weren't offered a cup of kool-aid!

reply to post by Mozzy

Proof that Jesus was real

You do mean: Proof that Jesus (IS) real.

Originally posted by Kapyong
...

So,
the Talmud contains NO evidence for Jesus,

What should I say but CRAP? Did you know that his name wasn't Jesus that is the Roman version of Mithra, did you know that Hebrew contains no J so I imagine there is NO JESUS in the Talmud but the Talmud dates much later than you say or claim or your source claims and is suspect to start with for your inaccuracies.

Look for Yeshua of Nazareth you may find what you're looking for, oh excuse me you're not looking for facts but fantasy.

I suppose the Oracle at Delphi never existed either? I suppose the other one that wrote on leaves was an imaginary person too? It's funny that they discount every history written by those there and incredibly even Pilate's Historian too. But they want to talk about 4 codices that may or may not be properly translated, its not like there was a Rosetta stone for Mayan...

Some people CHOOSE no to believe what is right before their eyes, but alas GOD said this very thing in HIS WORD...

Ro 1:20 For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:

2 Peter 3:4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

2 Thess. Chapter 2
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:
12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Originally posted by cropmuncher
Their were prob a lot of men called jesus back then, common enough name, but for him to be the son of your god then your god would have to exsist. Really god = nature & the son of god really means the sun of god/nature that the pagans used to worship. the 12 disciples were taken from the 12 months of the year, the cross on a circle represents the sun and the four seasons & on the winter solstice the sun died for 3 days and was born again on the 25th dec which was celebrated with great feasting by the pagans. Ringin any bells for ya?

Sorry mate but jesus,god & the like is just a self policing system of control
The only creative wonder is that of nature which is truely awesome

[edit on 3-12-2008 by cropmuncher]

12 disciples because there are 12 months? God does not equal nature...but if you want to break it down to the most basic element then God=Love from Love you get creation and of course nature. God is understood with reason not through laws or books or religion nor is he logically dismissed with mystic numerology, competing faiths, experience, or skeptic niliaism.

Originally posted by RFBurns
All I have to say about this is that if these ancient documents are believable..then so are the ancient Mayan and Aztec texts.

Yet those are thrown out as pure nonesense more than anything.

Why is that?

Why are one set of ancient texts believable just because it mentions God or Jesus, and others that do not have any reference to God or Jesus, are not considered valid????

Selective reading and belief is what I call it.

I suppose it was also selective choosing to remove much of the books and chapters from the entire historical record from the bible.

Hmm..

Cheers!!!!!

I study them. You see, the images, names and things change from culture to culture. But the lesson contained in the teachings I find are generally the same. It's only the idols that people fight about, the people without true understanding of what is being said.

It's like the myth that only Christians can go to heaven. That you must only believe in the idol of "Jesus". Well Jesus is certainly god, and the Path of Jesus is certainly the only true way. But there are multiple ways to express that truth, and to each culture they get their idol and teachings, as is best made for them to understand. Jesus even says he has other flocks to attend to. But as with christianity, those who focus only on the idol/image do not understand the truth and understanding being given to them.

Zeitgeist is supposed to turn people off from it, but it strengthened my understanding. It showed me why I was never given a name when I had my vision and understandings, the name is never the important thing. What makes a name what it is? It's the actions of the person carrying the name, and that is what is important. The path.

Thus why a 1 world religion is not needed. Only people needing to understand past the idols given to them.

reply to post by gordonwest


i did not necessarily mean that no. i meant that he was real, whether or not the stories are true is another subject.

I laughed so hard that milk came out my nose.

Originally posted by cropmuncher
the 12 disciples were taken from the 12 months of the year

No, there were 12 disciples because Israel had 12 tribes. This one I thought was fairly obvious.

Of course you could argue that there are 12 tribes because there are 12 months in a year. I could then argue that you have 10 fingers because there are 10 objects that make up our solar system.