Question about Jesus?

Question

I just read one answer, where an Athiest refered to Jesus as a fictional character. I know they think God is fictional and all, but isn't the fact that Jesus was a living, breathing human not up for debate? Isn't it a question of whether or not he was son of God?

Was this person right, is there no actual evidence that Jesus even existed?

Ok, I am not going to read the Bible. I asked for real evidence proving if he existed, I'm a history major (and no the Bible is not a history book) so I'm interested facts. Thanks to the intelligent answers so far.

Answer 1

The historical evidence for the existence of Jesus is simply overwhelming. While most atheists pride themselves on their intelligence, I wouldn't give this one the luxury. The Bible proves the existence of Jesus. The Koran acknowledges the existence of Jesus. The writings of Josephus overwhelmingly acknowledge the existence of Jesus. I do not expect an atheist to accept the deity of Christ, but to deny his existence is simply ludacris.

Answer 2

You're asking about the "historical Jesus". There is virtually no chance that someone named Jesus did not exist in the timeframe assigned to him in the Christian Bible, but a small number of scholars still doubt he existed. Generally, the argument is based on the fact that certain historical works do not mention Jesus.

But while the early church had many detractors and critics, who had a lot of critical things to say about Jesus, none of them claimed that Jesus did not exist. Presumably they would have had access to those who lived in the Judea around the time of Jesus and would have been able to say whether or not such a person actually existed.

Stating categorically that Jesus was "fictional" is a pure statement of faith not backed up by the historical record.

Answer 3

The problem is that in those times there was loads of Mary's, Josephs and Jesus'. The Jesus we refer to as Lord only had a ministry of three years before he died and was considered a criminal, a heretic and an evil man by the Sanhedrin. Before that, he was being schooled and learning the Jewish laws.
We as Christians can keep quoting the bible but, for the general populous, there isn't the proof they require to support his existence. All we look to is the reason that time was split into Before Christ (before the current terminology was created), that he IS recognised not only within Christianity but within other religions and that the documentation we recognise as a historic account tells us about him. But, as already stated, the rest is up to the individual. Just remember that mankind is skeptical by nature anyway - look at those trying to disprove the US moon landing and even the holocaust!

Just read your addition - the short, unemotional response would be no, there isn't a document that as a history major you would be abe to look up and quote.

Answer 4

There is some sketchy, second hand evidence that the human existed. But there are absolutely no primary sources directly connected to Yshua ben Ysef, so technically... no, there is no actual evidence.

Most archeologists and even some well known skeptics (James Randi, for example) will yield the existence of the man, Yshua ben Ysef.

Some however, will not yield even that much.

------------------------

Those who quote Josephus are failing to remember that ever reference to Yshua ben Ysef's having been miraculous or divine have been archeologically PROVEN to have been added LONG after Josephus's death by the early Roman Catholic Church.

Josephus' only factual reference that remains when the added material is removed is an acknowledgement that the man Yshua ben Ysef lived. However, as Josephus was born around 37AD, and Yshua ben Ysef would have died in 29AD (died at 33 years of age and was born 4BC), then 8 years would have passed between Yshua's crucifixion and Josephus's birth. Even granting that Josephus began his writings at the generous age of 12, that's 20 years between Yshua ben Ysef's death and Josephus's beginning to write of history.

Josephus is clearly a compromised and secondary source, not a reliable primary source.

Answer 5

Josephus, Jewish historian (AD 37-100) wrote of Jesus:

"About this time appeared Jesus, a wise man (if indeed it is right to call Him man; for He was a worker of astonishing deeds, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with joy), and He drew to Himself many Jews (many also of Greeks. This was the Christ.) And when Pilate, at the denunciation of those that are foremost among us, had condemned Him to the cross, those who had first loved Him did not abandon Him (for He appeared to them alive again on the third day, the holy prophets having foretold this and countless other marvels about Him.) The tribe of Christians named after Him did not cease to this day." (Jewish Antiquities, 18.3.3 ?63 )

Most scholars agree that the statements in italics were added later by others, most likely Christians. However, there has not been any dispute regarding the accuracy of his statement regarding the crucifixion of Jesus, which means he had to have been born.
Phlegon-Gentile Historian
"Phlegon mentioned the eclipse which took place during the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus and no other (eclipse); it is clear that he did not know from his sources about any (similar) eclipse in previous times . . . and this is shown by the historical account of Tiberius Caesar." Origen and Philopon, De. opif. mund. II21

Answer 6

The bible is proof he existed: The new testement was written by many people who knew jesus, and their accounts agree. There are also other versions of the gospel that aren't in the bible (we can't have a 30 foot thick bible) that support his existence as well. There are roman documents about his death as well. The atheists can't say he didn't exist, because there is so much evidence that says he did. If they claim that there wasn't a man named Jesus who said he was the Messiah, they are stupid and ignore evidence.

Answer 7

there is plenty of evidence he existed. He is a prophet for more than one religion, there is evidence from people who were not his followers, like the jewish priests and the roman leaders. Why would these people make up crucifying someone?

they were wrong, even if he was not the son of God, he deffinetly existed.

Answer 8

A man named Jesus did exist. There was a man named Jesus who was a profit of a religion that would develop into modern christianity.

Answer 9

It's quite possible that Jesus Christ is nothing more than a fictional character.

"Christianity borrowed its central myths and ceremonies from other ancient religions. The ancient world was rife with tales of virgin births, miracle-working saviors, tripartite gods, gods taking human form, gods arising from the dead, heavens and hells, and days of judgment. In addition to the myths, many of the ceremonies of ancient religions also match those of that syncretic latecomer, Christianity. To cite but one example (there are many others), consider Mithraism, a Persian religion predating Christianity by centuries. Mithra, the savior of the Mithraic religion and a god who took human form, was born of a virgin; he belonged to the holy trinity and was a link between heaven and Earth; and he ascended into heaven after his death. His followers believed in heaven and hell, looked forward to a day of judgment, and referred to Mithra as "the Light of the World." They also practiced baptism (for purification purposes) and ritual cannibalism—the eating of bread and the drinking of wine to symbolize the eating and drinking of the god’s body and blood. Given all this, Mithra’s birthday should come as no surprise: December 25th; this event was, of course, celebrated by Mithra’s followers at midnight.

Mithraism is but the most striking example of the appearance of these myths and ceremonies prior to the advent of Christianity. They appear—in more scattered form—in many other pre-Christian religions."

Answer 10

Jesus certainly was there and would return before the Dooms Day to fight the Anti-Christ.

But he was no God, but a messenger of God.

Please check out www.islamtomorrow.com