I have a question?

Question

This only applies to people that have doubts about the exsistence of Jesus.

Why is it that:

We can assume that Caesar, Alexander the Great, Muhammed, Buddha really existed because our history books and historians say so... but the exsistence of the most famous and influencial man in HISTORY is questioned?

You know I'm talking about Jesus, right?

Is it because we have their remains? Did you ever wonder why they never found the most famous man in history's remains?

For those who know Jesus existed, before you say, "we do know he existed", read my first sentence.

Jett, would you like me to list the Roman and Hebrew secular historians that wrote about Jesus?

Sho,

Paul didn't save me from my sin.

Answer 1

All of those people are in historical documents, Jesus, not so much. Writers like Josephus, were actually born after Jesus supposedly died. That said, I don't doubt, even with little evidence, that a man named Jesus existed at the time in some religious sense.

EDIT: I think you should research what is classified as historical evidence. Historians and writers who did not see events or were born after them can not write historical evidence on a topic.

Answer 2

Intelligent question, and as a trained historian, one I've read about widely. It would appear to be the height of folly to say that someone clsoely matching the description of Joshua bar Jospeh didn't do some of the things attributed to him. After all, there is a very specific timing to some of the later events in the gospels. Pontius Pilate was governer, Herod was king, and the pardoning of Barrabus was part of a Passover tradition. So you have a man with a name and lineage crucified within a relatively specific timeframe. There is a degree of greyness about the charges that warranted this execution, and many historians, most notably AN Wilson, have suggested that the Jesus who was crucified, while probably the same Jesus who was born on the road to Bethlehem, was maybe not the same Jesus who came up with some of the key parables and/or miracles for which the scriptural Jesus is rightly famous. He cites a range of differences in tone and even message to back up this hypothesis, which of course at this remote posterity is all that it can be. There were certainly many wandering candidates for Messiah-hood in the region during the period, and Joshua was not, unfortunately an uncommon name either, so there is at least some scope for his theory to exist.

Ultimately though, it doesn't matter. To those who don't believe he was the ultimate Messiah, he might well be a composite figure of two men without it mattering to the story, and to those who believe he was and is that Messiah, the single life-story belongs to one man. Either way, the absence of bones is inconsequential - just as crucifixion was commonplace, bones were everywhere, and the story as it's told tends towards the idea of the bones not being found in any case.

The existence of Jesus the man is difficult and ultimately pointless to refute. The NATURE of his existence is somthing that will keep people talking for hundreds of years yet ;o)

Answer 3

Hey, I'm not saying Jesus didn't EXIST, I'm saying that he wasn't the son of this so-called god. I believe that he existed, and that he was a good guy with a message of peace and love. I just don't believe in a god, so how can I believe in a son of a god?

Also, I don't believe he is the most famous and influencial man in history. During his lifetime, he had his followers and a whole bunch of people who hated him, not too influencial there. As for fame, yeah, he's really well known, but anywhere that christianity had spread, other things had spread too. Believe it or not, there ARE people out there who don't know who Jesus is and you should be okay with that!

However, I believe that Jesus IS the most misquoted and misintepreted man in history. I mean, kings and other corrupt leaders have been manipulating his word to make poor peasants do whatever the ruler wishes. Not exactly "what Jesus would have done".

Answer 4

The existance of Jesus of Nazereth is not nearly as well documented as the other examples in your question. They are documented by multiple sources, whereas, Jesus' life seems to be missing from most historical texts other than the Bible. This does seem strange given the importance and influence the Jesus legacy. Although I tend to lean toward Jesus being one man, there are some theories that the legend of Jesus was built as a composite of several different teachers of that era.

What I do doubt, nay dispute, is that he was conceived any other way than normal, or that he was anything other than a man.

Answer 5

I assume you're going to get the standard "Because he rose from the dead and there are no remains." answer. We have old stories about someone named Jesus, yes. But there is no empirical -proof- that he existed other than these stories (and yes, they are stories, there are a lot of them that talk about this Jesus Christ person, and the ones that exhibit a different point of view than expressed in the Holy Bible have been left out of it because there are differences in opinion on him) Find me an artifact that has his name and information about him on it that is not an old storybook, and I'm sure more people would accept his existance. I was brought up in a christian household, so it's not that I don't believe in him, just that I think that there was and still is a lot of controversy over who and what he was. I say he had some nice teachings, but really, I don't think he brought anything new to religion. There had been plenty of divine conception going on with Zeus and such as well.... Ahh, I'm rambling now. *shrug* Just my opinions, I'm sure some will not agree....

Answer 6

there is so little actual documentation outside a massively reproduced collection of books that were saved of the editing of the Council of Nicea

many current copies only go to 150 or so AD, and most told in 3rd person by people known to not be the deciples

I'm sure jesus and other messiahs did exist, but not in the capacity and superman stories attributed to that person

450 or more all failed to remove Roman occupation and jesus never returned, fullfilling Acts 5:34 - 39

have a nice day

Answer 7

I don't doubt Jesus existing. I'm just not sure I believe in immaculate conception or that he was the son of God.

I also recognize that alot of the history surround Caesar, Alexander the Great, Muhammed, and Buddha is not the whole truth either. History is written by the dominant group and what they choose to say.

Answer 8

People didn't get it, the name Jesus doesn't have to be the one to be focus but instead he's stories or deeds, Jesus isn't meant to be a person, Jesus is a word. it doesn't really matter if he existed or not, the purpose is for the people to follow the Jesus path to everlasting life, not investigate on his background.

Answer 9

I don't think that so many people doubt the existence of Jesus, just the claim that he is the son of God. I mean, was Caeser really all that great or did the story gain weight over the centuries?
I'm sure that Jesus did in fact exist, but why should I beleive that he is the sone of God.
And he's only the most influential man in WESTERN history. People born and raised in India or Laos could give two sh*ts.

Answer 10

Because there's plenty of historical evidence for Caesar, Alexander the Great, Muhammad, & Buddha...there is NONE for Jesus.