Extra-biblical Eyewitness Evidence for Jesus?

Question

Does it strike the Xians as odd that there is no 1st hand accounts of Jesus outside the Bible?

The accounts of Josephus (faked IMO), Tacitus and others are all just 2nd hand stories. They never saw Jesus, just heard stories from unnamed sources. Doesn't it seem odd that no one noticed this guy allegedly running around feeding 5,000, raising the dead, walking on water, healing people left and right? Does it seem odd that the people who allegedly hated him so much do not even write 1 sentence about him? Isn't it strange that only after his 'resurrection' people started talking about him?

Same goes for Noah, Abraham and others. Outside the bible there is no proof that any of these people ever existed.

Can you even wrap your mind around that fact that all of this is just made up? I have been challenging Xians for years to give me 1 piece of evidence for any of the magical nonsense in the bible. So far no one can.

The Xians are already making me laugh. They say there is evidence but produce none.

A city was named after a guy? OK so I guess we should belive in Fairies since there is a place called Fairy, Texas?

Hmm...Mr. Religion, wrong on all 5 accounts. I asked for extra biblical eyewitnesses of Jesus. Not Apologetics on why you think the bible is accurate. Your entire premise is flawed from the start. Try again.

Please stop the disinformation. The Talmud never mentions Jesus. Gnostic writings? If they are so accurate why were they not included in the canon?

u phail.

Answer 1

It is extraordinarily odd, since the people of this time period are known as prolific historians. It is also odd that there is no historical record of many of the extraordinary events that take place in the Bible, like the slaughter of every first born male child. That is not an event that you just sweep under the rug. It would have been talked about and recorded for many generations afterwards.

Answer 2

You seem to be looking at the Bible as only a book of religious context. Did it ever occur to you that it is a record of historically accurate significance.

The Torah (Old Testament) is used in Israel to teach history to school students. Like many past eras, there was a verbal history passed from one generation to the next. That was the norm in ancient cultures, and for the Jews, the verbal record is in agreement with the written record. Why should that not continue into the New Testament.

Read it as a historical document, and you'd be amazed at the eye witness accounts.

Answer 3

Christ in history:

Rejecting the bible as an accurate historical account makes no logical sense. There is just too much archeological and historical data that verifies the history recorded in the bible. For starters, Google "historical accuracy of the bible" and do some research. Even among non-believers, appeals to the non-existence of the historical Jesus makes most wince as they are just too preposterous and embarrassing when raised.

I am confident you will find most scholars are comfortable using the bible as a record of ancient history. You will also find that many archeologists start with the bible's accounts as pointers for their field work.

Craig offers (see link below) five reasons assuming that the biblical New Testament gospels are reliable until proven wrong (to date they have not):

1. There was insufficient time for legendary influences to expunge the historical facts. The interval of time between the events themselves and recording of them in the gospels is too short to have allowed the memory of what had or had not actually happened to be erased.

2. The gospels are not analogous to folk tales or contemporary "urban legends."

3. The Jewish transmission of sacred traditions was highly developed and reliable. In an oral culture like that of first century Palestine the ability to memorize and retain large tracts of oral tradition was a highly prized and highly developed skill. From the earliest age children in the home, elementary school, and the synagogue were taught to memorize faithfully sacred tradition. The disciples would have exercised similar care with the teachings of Jesus.

4. There were significant restraints on the embellishment of traditions about Jesus, such as the presence of eyewitnesses and the apostles’ supervision. Since those who had seen and heard Jesus continued to live and the tradition about Jesus remained under the supervision of the apostles, these factors would act as a natural check on tendencies to elaborate the facts in a direction contrary to that preserved by those who had known Jesus.

5. The Gospel writers have a proven track record of historical reliability.

On the topic of extra-biblical accounts of Christ see:

http://www.probe.org/content/view/18/77/

Craig on Evidence for Christ:
http://www.leaderu.com/offices/billcraig/docs/rediscover2.html

Writings by those skeptical of Christ's divinity (who would certainly not want to perpetuate a myth that He existed if He did not):

The Jewish Talmud mentions Christ, although some will dispute this ineffectively.

There are also numerous Gnostic writings that quote Christ. These writers certainly had no love of Christ as God, so quoting Him is just more evidence that Christ existed.

EDIT:
Seems from your polemics above, no matter what anyone presents to you as a rational argument, your mind is made up.

It seems that non-believers like yourself have become increasingly shrill of late, apparently hoping that saying something more loudly and more dogmatically will make it seem more credible, especially to their embattled supporters. Believers have nothing to fear from this hostile rhetoric, unpleasant through it may be. Hopelessly overstated arguments that once seemed so persuasive such as "science disproves God" or "Jesus never existed" have lost their credibility, becoming mindless slogans, where once they were cutting-edge ideas. The non-believer's rhetoric is about preaching to the converted, shoring up a collapsing building with rhetoric rather than rigorous argument.

Likewise, the questions being posed (see above) are sometimes poorly formed or are laden with underlying bias that tells the reader that no cogent and rigorous answer will satisfy the asker.

Answer 4

There is another record that testifies of Christ. It is the Book of Mormon. It reaffirms what the Bible says and clarifies certain ambiguities. There are also modern witnesses to Christ, Joseph Smith saw God the Father and Jesus Christ. Just as people discredit these true accounts, they will not believe any other account which testifies of Christ. The fact that Muslims believe Christ was a prophet and he appears in the Qu'ran, is also evidence to his existence. Yet no sure proof will come, because people who do not want to believe will always find a way not to.

Answer 5

Even the Islamic religion acknowledges Christ but only as a prophet not as God. There are many ancient resources but if you're looking for physical evidence there are ancient writings that back up the bible as written today (dead sea scrolls for one).

Answer 6

Id also like to know why the Romans seem to have forgotten to keep record of his crucifixtion, despite being awesome record keepers....

Answer 7

p.c.. up a historic past e book. and that i will warning you that declaring which you're a "no longer a non secular nut yet a real looking person who knows the magnitude of religion" will seem humorous to an excellent form of Europeans. that's a factor of the international that has dealt with faith and human beings in power proclaiming faith as their known rigidity for doing stuff, way, way, way in the previous the U.S. grew to become into ever an theory to anybody. And extra often than not, it has ended in dying and human beings hating one yet another. you will no longer be able to clutter with historic past. Europe has been by using one in all those good form of wars and conflicts throughout the time of their time that have been interior the call of religion. The Inquisition, the expulsion of Jews from many international locations. The Muslim conquest of Europe into Spain, the Moors, the conflict of excursions, the conflict for Vienna, the Hugenots in France, and that's merely the top of iceberg. i'm thinking that even nevertheless some Europeans are non secular, many are actually not, as they deem faith as area of the reason as to why one in all those good form of have died on their soil. They lost finished generations of adult males to wars referred to as interior the call of religion. terrible, bloody conflicts that overwhelmed households that introduced difficulty to maximum, repeatedly lower back throughout the time of the generations. i think of an excellent form of Europeans are merely ill of it. So in the previous you barge in right here and declare which you're non secular, understand the magnitude of religion, and understand what's what, p.c.. up a historic past e book, show your self, and comprehend how many have are available in the previous you interior the call of religion in Europe, and the top result grew to become into 1000's, an in some case, tens of millions lifeless. you may properly be a righteous Christian. yet do no longer pass barging into yet another area of the international that has extra historic past concerning Christianity than you care to shake a stick at, and pontificate. you do no longer understand something approximately this area of the international. study, show your self. With historic past books. There are diverse perspectives obtainable that are diverse from yours, and that they carry credence. And the Bible does not carry each and every of the solutions. show your self approximately how the Bible, particularly the King James Bible, grew to become into assembled. crammed with extra politics than you care to need to correctly known.

Answer 8

well look in the Hebrew books of history! and Israel how can you denied this ancient citizens from Israel!! all these men existed because it's written in the history of their country!

Also part of The roman empire and the Greek history, tells about the existence of Jesus, Paul and the apostles.

the only proof we got is by pencil and paper, because in those times there were no video cameras to show their physical image!!

please read your history books!! i think you have failed world history!

Answer 9

yes, i mentioned that to my friend this morning, that the bible is like a game of telephone. the stories were handed down and down and down my mouth before being written. how much of the truth was left in them?

Answer 10

Its a bit of a problem.