Please do not give fanatical answers !
2007-04-08 22:07:25 · 22 answers · asked by TopContributorLevel27Points12333 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Unfortunately, none. As for Josephus even the Catholic Church admits the entry to be a forgery. . Bishop Eusebus seems the most likely culprit for the additional lines.
This article in wikipedia presents the case against the Josephus entry quite fairly.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephus_on_Jesus
2007-04-08 22:15:13 · answer #1 · answered by U-98 6 · 2⤊ 6⤋
Yes. First, as some have mentioned, there is Josephus. The fact that he mentions Jesus at ALL is in of itself a huge deal.
Pliny the Younger also wrote about Jesus, and the early Christian church.
Cornelius Tacitus wrote about Jesus and the early Christians as early as 115 A.D.
Thallus wrote about the crucifixion of Jesus as early as 52 A.D.
Also, there is historical evidence of the Apostles, and the fact that only one of them died of natural causes.
The New Testament, though some think it's "slanted," is actually an EXCELLENT source of historical information on Jesus. Luke was a historian and doctor, and his account is considered VERY accurate. The New Testament dates back to within a couple years of Jesus's resurrection. The creed in 1 Corinthians 15 dates back to between 33 and 38 A.D. The oldest book of the New Testament dates back to around 45 A.D.
There are more. You just have to know where to look.
Here is a very interesting website which goes over several of the arguments against the existence of Jesus:
http://www.kingdavid8.com/YesJesusExisted.html
And you can always look at some of these:
http://us.search.yahoo.com/search?ei=utf-8&fr=ieas-tb&p=%22historical%20writings%22%20and%20%22Jesus%22
2007-04-09 09:08:15 · answer #2 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Is it really worth our time to offer historic evidence to someone who ignores evidence?
Anyway, how about the gospels? Are eye-witness accounts good enough? (Historians consider eye-witness accounts the highest level of authority as far as evidence.)
Personally, I would like corroboration from a different angle. For example, within 50 years of Jesus' death, Jesus' religion had spread all the way to Rome, and within 100 years, the Roman Empire was beginning to turn upside down as a result of a very obscure, uneducated fisherman from a hamlet in an uninfluential territory outside the mainstream of Roman life.
What are the odds of that happening if Jesus was totally fictional?
2007-04-09 05:26:07 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
There was a man named Jesus Christ. In the same way there was a man named Aristotle, Aesop, Emperor Nero, Valerian, Eucleides, etc.
We may not have any body or remains of them but these were real men.
He was also recorded by the Romans who were in Jerusalem at that time as census was required in the Roman Empire.
2007-04-09 05:24:02 · answer #4 · answered by 0 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
No. But belief in Christ is supposed to be without proof. Billions of people have made the leap. Why do you require proof?
Is that the "fanatical" answer you didn't want?
2007-04-09 05:11:31 · answer #5 · answered by ssbn598 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
THE Tomb that Jesus Christ lay in for 3 days is THE ONLY Tourist Attraction in the WORLD that people got to see THAT IS EMPTY AND THERE IS NOTHING THERE as HE IS RISEN, and is sitting in Heaven beside the Father waiting for the day of HIS RETURN. Would you be disappointed to hear about a great new spices of animal that was discovered and go to see it only to find it did not exist? This IS THE only item that man will travel to to see, and find it EMPTY. Praise God in the Highest.
2007-04-09 05:59:47 · answer #6 · answered by Ex Head 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Read the 1st Century secular historian Josephus.
He was not a follower of Christ....a Jew by birth and later "adopted" into a Roman family of power. He was present at the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple in 70 AD and his "War of the Jews" was published only a few years later.
He mentions Jesus in his chronicles.
2007-04-09 05:10:47 · answer #7 · answered by Augustine 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Yes there is historical proof outside of the Jewish men and women who wrote of Him.
It is very little from the likes of Joesephus, and a Roman counterpart historian. That is all I know about aside from the original sources we have collected in the Holy Bible.
2007-04-09 05:41:25 · answer #8 · answered by the old dog 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Actually yes there is...and not just in hte bible.
Of course there is the trial proof of poncious pilot, when he interegated him and of course killed him
THere are many pieces of actual evidence in early churches, writings from contemporaries and of course the books of the bible which (the 4 gospels in particular, which was written 4 times!..they must have thought it was pretty important to write it)
Remember Peter, who was a disciple started the Catholic church..i mean he was the first pope....he kinda knew Jesus and used that to start the church.
2007-04-09 05:24:39 · answer #9 · answered by mareeclara 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I've seen series on the history channel that point out proof of the existence of Jesus Christ. Go to their web site and see if you can't search for those episodes.
2007-04-09 05:13:34 · answer #10 · answered by Sharisse F 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
There is no proof of anything. Even gravity is still ''the theory of gravity,'' because we haven't gone to every place in the universe and tested to see if it applies there. No, I am not christian and NO, there is no proof, believe or don't believe. I don't care. It's your life. Even if there was proof that christ really walked the earth, I don't believe in the things that are in that book. So, I would still not be a christian.
2007-04-09 05:17:43 · answer #11 · answered by rep206 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋