2007-02-19 07:25:44 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
actually there is not. there is more evidence of Jesus, not only biblical eveidence but others as well, like josephus. it has been said that there is more evidence of Jesus, than there is of Washington.
2007-02-19 07:30:03 · answer #1 · answered by pstod 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
First off, there 's not more evidence on King Tuts life than Jesus. The Bible has all the evidence you need to know about Jesus. I haven't seen a book on King Tut, one that HE wrote, but have you? The fact is, it may seem like there is more evidence on King Tut, but that's also what you learn in school, so of course your going to know a lot about him. They don't teach Jesus in public schools, which could be a reason why you think there's not a lot of evidence of him.
2007-02-19 07:35:28 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Let's assume that Jesus existed, and that King Tut existed. The difference between them seems that Tut held the position of king in his country. Jesus, on the other hand, spoke against the leaders of his religion and country.
The powerful write history, the poor just endure it. Jesus became powerful long after his death, so the actual evidence exists more as stories, not historical facts.
Josephus, the Jewish historian, made only one or two references to Jesus in all of the volumes he wrote. Most scholars take that to mean that Josephus, who made up part of the elite, knew very little about Jesus.
2007-02-19 07:41:11 · answer #3 · answered by marcosarroyos2003 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because Jesus was an unimportant peasant, and King Tut was as high as you could get.
And evidence for Jesus is really not that abundant. Someone needs to understand what they're reading a little better. The Nag doesn't really count.
2007-02-19 07:35:23 · answer #4 · answered by Blue 4 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Because King Tut actually existed.
2007-02-19 07:29:53 · answer #5 · answered by Kallan 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Because Jesus left nothing behind, he is risen! King Tut on the other hand died and left his body and possesions behind while his soul is or was judged by God.
2007-02-19 07:31:00 · answer #6 · answered by drivn2excelchery 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Who said there was? Almost all historians believe that such as man as Jesus actually existed (and we know a lot about his life from historical evidence) Even many athiests believe Jesus existed. What evidence about his existence don't you accept?
2007-02-19 07:36:54 · answer #7 · answered by Someone special 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because Jesus didn't exist. Or there were many of him. He probably didn't even say most of whats attributed to him even IF he did exist.
King Tut is a real person.
2007-02-19 07:34:42 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Go read a high school history book. You will find that Jesus is not in question, as to whether he was a real person historically, we know that he existed. The debate lies on is he the son of God.
2007-02-19 07:34:21 · answer #9 · answered by tjg1987 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
This is a very good and factual question. I believe because the story of Jesus is mythical.
2007-02-19 07:41:29 · answer #10 · answered by MoPleasure4U 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋