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

HumAnnunaki

MamaJ
Some writings actually portray him as one who practiced witchcraft and or sorcery.

His-story accounts do not deny he is "real". Everything else though, per scholars, is debatable.

Imagine if he were here today.
He would probably cause a massive revolt and if he did any kind of magic,
we would kill him.

History of that era depicts some prophets as Shaman's.
Usually covered in astrological tattoos and partial to 'herbs'
to help them have eyes for which to see.

If some peace loving humanitarian such as this had lived
in today's society -
IMAGINE what the message would be..

edit on 1-1-2014 by HumAnnunaki because: (no reason given)

Imagine there's no Lennon.

Since its been brought up repeatedly that we are getting off topic, here is a list of ones I know of:
Jesus outside the Bible:

Tacitus:

But all human efforts, all the lavish gifts of the emperor, and the propitiations of the gods, did not banish the sinister belief that the conflagration was the result of an order. Consequently, to get rid of the report, 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, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular.

Suetonius:

"Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome."

Julius Africanus writing about a now lost work of Thallus:

This event followed each of his deeds, and healings of body and soul, and knowledge of hidden things, and his resurrection from the dead, all sufficiently proven to the disciples before us and to his apostles: after the most dreadful darkness fell over the whole world, the rocks were torn apart by an earthquake and much of Judaea and the rest of the land was torn down. Thallus calls this darkness an eclipse of the sun in the third book of his Histories, without reason it seems to me. For....how are we to believe that an eclipse happened when the moon was diametrically opposite the sun?

Jesus Christ..underwent his passion in the 18th year of Tiberius [32 AD]. Also at that time in another Greek compendium we find an event recorded in these words: "the sun was eclipsed, Bithynia was struck by an earthquake, and in the city of Nicaea many buildings fell." All these things happened to occur during the Lord's passion. In fact, Phlegon, too, a distinguished reckoner of Olympiads, wrote more on these events in his 13th book, saying this: "Now, in the fourth year of the 202nd Olympiad [32 AD], a great eclipse of the sun occurred at the sixth hour [noon] that excelled every other before it, turning the day into such darkness of night that the stars could be seen in heaven, and the earth moved in Bithynia, toppling many buildings in the city of Nicaea.

Phlegon of Tralles

"In the 4th year of the 202nd Olympiad, there was a great eclipse of the Sun, greater than had ever been known before, for at the 6th hour the day was changed into night and the stars were seen in the heavens. An earthquake occurred in Bythinia and overthrew a great part of the city of Nicæa."

Pliny the Younger

They affirmed, however, that the whole of their guilt, or their error, was, that they were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verse a hymn to Christ as to a god, and bound themselves to a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft, adultery, never to falsify their word, not to deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up

Flavius Josephus

And now Caesar, upon hearing the death of Festus, sent Albinus into Judea, as procurator. But the king deprived Joseph of the high priesthood, and bestowed the succession to that dignity on the son of Ananus, who was also himself called Ananus... Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrin of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned

Now some of the Jews thought that the destruction of Herod's army came from God, and that very justly, as a punishment of what he did against John, that was called the Baptist: for Herod slew him, who was a good man... Herod, who feared lest the great influence John had over the people might put it into his power and inclination to raise a rebellion... Accordingly he was sent a prisoner, out of Herod's suspicious temper, to Macherus, the castle I before mentioned, and was there put to death.

and of course

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.

I'm not sure if these have already been mentioned or not. Of course each can be disputed, as can anything if you want to dispute it fervently enough. Don't forget that Christ is also mentioned in the Quran and the Talmud.

reply to post by Scope and a Beam


There is significant historical documentation.

Have you considered that ignorance does not equate with an absence of evidence?

But there's no YouTube video (It would probably be CGI anyway).

Murgatroid, there is no doubt that "the elite" manipulate history. That began in 325 CE at the Council of Nicea, if not earlier, when Constantine created Christianity for all intents and purposes. He needed a tool to bring the Empire together. Good point!

We have addressed in detail the issues with blanket arguments (from authority and ad populum) that NT Scholars regularly use to claim that the existence of Christians prove the existence of "a Christ."(Aren't you quoting Bart Erhman again there? He also wrote a book at the same time claiming that half the NT (including the Gospels) are clearly forgeries.) We have also most of us ceded that there could have been a Jesus, maybe, maybe not, but there is NO RELIABLE EVIDENCE OUTSIDE THE BIBLE THAT IS CONTEMPORANEOUS WITH HIS LISTED LIFETIME.

reply to post by dragonridr

You could no more prove a roman emperor existed if you couldn't use roman sources.

There is HARD, PHYSICAL evidence of roman emperors - they had coins made with their likenesses on them; they had walls built from shore to shore (you've heard of Hadrian, right?), and things like the Coliseum.

You're really reaching here, dragon.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


There IS no if...

FACT: "History" HAS been erased and tampered with.

"The falsification of history has done more to impede human development than any one thing known to mankind" - Rousseau

“the biggest cover-up in the history of mankind is the history of mankind itself”

“There are two histories: official history, lying, and then secret history, where you find the real causes of events.” ~ Honoré de Balzac

The Illuminati realized they had to deceive an entire population of people if they had any hope whatsoever of achieving their coveted New World Order. As early as 1911, the Illuminati began buying textbook writing companies, until they owned them all after World War I. Once they got control of textbooks, they gradually began to "dumb down" the curricula and rewrite history. Rewriting history was the first step in achieving the New World Order. Source

reply to post by Murgatroid


Again, if history has no truth to it then why do you think history told the truth about Jesus? If history is one huge lie then the history of Jesus must also be a lie.

reply to post by Murgatroid

That includes your messiah.

Murgatroid
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

 

There IS no if...

FACT: "History" HAS been erased and tampered with.

"The falsification of history has done more to impede human development than any one thing known to mankind" - Rousseau

“the biggest cover-up in the history of mankind is the history of mankind itself”

“There are two histories: official history, lying, and then secret history, where you find the real causes of events.” ~ Honoré de Balzac

The Illuminati realized they had to deceive an entire population of people if they had any hope whatsoever of achieving their coveted New World Order. As early as 1911, the Illuminati began buying textbook writing companies, until they owned them all after World War I. Once they got control of textbooks, they gradually began to "dumb down" the curricula and rewrite history. Rewriting history was the first step in achieving the New World Order. Source

The Illuminati were an anti monarchist group who were put down and ended at least a century ago.

Your "source" seems to reference another 'alternate view' public forum. Hardly validated fact!

chr0naut
reply to post by Scope and a Beam

 

There is significant historical documentation.

Have you considered that ignorance does not equate with an absence of evidence?

But there's no YouTube video (It would probably be CGI anyway).

Then where is the significant historical documentation? List it if you will. Prove it. We have discussed Josephus, Tacitus, Pliny, Seutonius multiple times in this discussion to the point of ad nauseam. I am honestly astounded that folks chime in when they haven't read the discussion completely.

Are you trying to use the old chestnut "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" by chance chr0naut? Oh good Lord!

Perhaps not. However, evidence of absence IS evidence of absence. That is the position I have taken and most of the folks arguing against Historical Jesus in the discussion.

This is at the point of useless head-beating against wall. Best all.

Oh, don't forget that there are a TON of pseudepigraphical texts as well, such as multiple versions of the “Acts of Pontious Pilot”. One of my favorites is the “Gospel of Nicodemus”, which goes into detail on some things only glossed over in the Gospels, such as the “harrowing of hell”...

Gryphon66
Murgatroid, there is no doubt that "the elite" manipulate history. That began in 325 CE at the Council of Nicea, if not earlier, when Constantine created Christianity for all intents and purposes. He needed a tool to bring the Empire together. Good point!

Sorry, but that is the biggest bunch of bunk ever. Its comes from Dan Browns fictional book the DaVinci Code, and has spread through the ranks of unbelievers like its fact.

There were already church elders, many of whom have been mentioned on preceding pages in the early church 200 years+ before Constantine was even an impure thought in his fathers brain.

The minutes of the Council of Nicaea still exist, and none of these supposedly nefarious things people claim happened there.

reply to post by defcon5

Who jotted them down and when?

reply to post by daskakik

There are lots of them, you'd have to look into each one and see who, when, and why it was not included in the bible. There were also books, such as the “The Shepherd of Hermas” that even the early church fathers felt should have been canonical.

reply to post by defcon5

Well I googled “Acts of Pontious Pilot” and got only 5 hits and they where all posts by particulars in forums.

reply to post by defcon5

The minutes of the Council of Nicaea still exist, and none of these supposedly nefarious things people claim happened there.

Do you think they would have included these nefarious things in this documentation? Who would broadcast their own evil plot to those they are trying to deceive? Leaders have always lied and they always will.

defcon5
Oh, don't forget that there are a TON of pseudepigraphical texts as well, such as multiple versions of the “Acts of Pontious Pilot”. One of my favorites is the “Gospel of Nicodemus”, which goes into detail on some things only glossed over in the Gospels, such as the “harrowing of hell”...

Oh, I want to leave the discussion but I cannot! ... LOL.

Defcon, are you saying here that the pseudepigraphic texts serve as contemporaneous references to Jesus that are outside the Bible? Are you including all the writings of the Gnostics as well? (Which, to my mind in a different discussion, probably provide more excellent evidence of what early Christians ACTUALLY thought and believed than the post-Nicean standardization). I'd have to argue that if even the Councils of the Church noted these as non-canonical or of unlikely authorship at the time then we cannot use them as reliable evidence since they would be forgeries, fabrications or fantasies.

Right? I'd love to hear more on your ideas in this regard ... I just can't see it.

reply to post by daskakik


try just "the acts of pilate".

defcon5

Gryphon66
Murgatroid, there is no doubt that "the elite" manipulate history. That began in 325 CE at the Council of Nicea, if not earlier, when Constantine created Christianity for all intents and purposes. He needed a tool to bring the Empire together. Good point!

Sorry, but that is the biggest bunch of bunk ever. Its comes from Dan Browns fictional book the DaVinci Code, and has spread through the ranks of unbelievers like its fact.

There were already church elders, many of whom have been mentioned on preceding pages in the early church 200 years+ before Constantine was even an impure thought in his fathers brain.

The minutes of the Council of Nicaea still exist, and none of these supposedly nefarious things people claim happened there.

Easy defcon ... I didn't make any of the Dan Brown claims, did I? Read what I said again. Constantine called the Council of Nicea in order to standardize Christianity, and afterwards, Christianity was standardized. That is my claim. Are you arguing with that statement? What part of it? What am I saying that you attribute to Dan Brown?

reply to post by defcon5

Did that and it brought up a bunch more. So far it looks like Chistians writing about chistians things?

I'll look into it but, I must say that I won't be surprised if all I see is circular logic.