Christians, aside for the fact that there is no historical evidence...?

Question

from the time of the life of Jesus to indicate the existence of Jesus, what else do you require do find reasonable doubt that Jesus may not have ever existed.

Answer 1

Scabius Fretful –

Flavius Josephus was born around A.D. 37. And, speaking of him, there is no record of a city, town or village called Nazareth, even in the detailed list of cities and towns in Galilee compiled by Josephus. Nor is such as place ever mentioned in the Old Testament.

There is no physical or contemporary historical evidence of any kind that anyone named Jesus, or anyone that could have been Jesus, ever lived. There is no description of what Jesus might have looked like from anyone who would have been alive to see him at the time Jesus was supposed to have lived. Similarly, there is not one word he might ever have spoken that was written down by anyone who could have been there.

There is no mention of Jesus, or anyone like him, in the records of Jerusalem or of the personal or official papers of Pontius Pilate (or any other Roman official). Similarly, there is no record of a crucifixion that could have been that of Jesus. The supposed darkness that fell upon the earth at the time he died was not mentioned by anyone anywhere on the planet, including Jerusalem itself.

If Jesus did live, no one at the time thought his live worth noting or documenting. If he was crucified in Jerusalem, no one seems to have cared, or even noticed.

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

cathy -

There is NO evidence, so what more is there to 'come out'?

It is difficult to prove that something does not exist.

---------------------
KEVIN D -

Was everyone Jesus either knew or met illiterate also?

---------------------------
Silver -

It could not be just 'much evidence', it would have to be every shred of evidence. And, why would they destroy their own government records from that time (oh, that's right, they didn't) - all of which also fail to mention Jesus or reference anyone who could have been Jesus.

-------------------
angeltress -

And that evidence would be exactly what?

You have done exactly what you accuse others of doing - that is a cheap (and very Christian) trick.

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

djmantx --

Hey Maynard – it is “you’re (‘you are’) uneducated”, not “your uneducated”.

You should not insult the intelligence of others when you are, yourself, not packing any.

----------------------
h20andspirit -

In the context of historical investigation, ‘contemporary’ means being alive at the same time – not after the person is dead.

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

The_Cricket –

How do you know the size of Nazareth? Besides, in the Gospels, Nazareth is referred to as a CITY (and the New Testament does make distinctions between village, town, and city). Regardless, there is no historical record or artifact from such a place.

No one knows who actually wrote any of Gospels, and whoever they were, even they never claim to have met the earthly Jesus, and the original manuscripts do not even exist. The earliest is probably Mark (70 C.E.), although no one knows who wrote it, where they wrote it, or exactly when they wrote it.

Let’s not forget that the average life span then was about 30 years. Paul's biblical letters are the oldest surviving Christian texts (60 C.E.). However, there occurs not a single instance in all of Paul's writings that he ever meets or sees an earthly Jesus, nor does he give any reference to Jesus' life on earth. The Gospel of John disagrees with events described in Mark, Matthew, and Luke; and it was written in Greek around A.D. 90-100.

Here is a question: Many of the statements attributed to Jesus claim to have come from him when he was alone – how do you figure that?

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

The stories of Jesus do not meet the same standards as things considered to be historically reliable. It is not like writing about JFK (or George Washington, etc.) where there are thousands of pieces of contemporary (first-hand) documentary evidence.

What about the ever-popular Jesus?

The Gospels claim that Jesus was well and widely known, not only by his many followers, but also Priests, Pontius Pilate, and Herod, knew "of the fame of Jesus" (Matt 14:1)" and that the multitude of people thought of Jesus as a prophet as well as a teacher, healer, and miracle worker (Matt:14:5).

(Matt: 4:25) states that "there followed him [Jesus] great multitudes of people from Galilee, and from Decapolis, and from Jerusalem, and from Judea, and from beyond Jordon." (Luke 12:1) speaks of, "innumerable multitude of people... trod one upon another" and, "fame abroad of him… and great multitudes came together to hear..." (Luke 5:15).

The persecution of Jesus in Jerusalem was such a big deal that the Prefect Pontius Pilate and the High Priest Joseph Caiaphas not only knew about it, but were part of it (Matt 21:15-23, 26:3, Luke 19:47, 23:13).

If this is all true, why is Jesus NEVER MENTIONED by any of these people? And, why are there NO RECORDS about any of this or even of ANYONE (Jesus or otherwise) having great multitudes of followers or going around performing miracles?



I suppose this is just another instance of having the Bible meaning or saying whatever you want it to mean or say whenever you want it to mean or say that, huh?

Answer 2

perhaps the greatest evidence that Jesus did exist is the fact that literally thousands of christians in the first century a.d., including the 12 apostles, were willing to give their lives as martyrs for Jesus Christ. people will die for what they believe to be true, but no one will die for what they know to be a lie.

ps -it's important to remember in 70 a.d., the romans invaded and destroyed jerusalem and most of israel- entire cities were literally burned to the ground. i'm not surprised if much evidence of Jesus' existence was destroyed. many of the eye-witnesses of Jesus would have been killed. these facts likely limited the amount of surviving eyewitness testimony of Jesus.

Answer 3

Silly child, there is plenty of historical evidence for Jesus.
You should not believe everything you are told, but do the research for yourself.
Some idiot says "there is no historical evidence that Jesus ever lived" and, before the day is out, atheists are parroting him.
And then they actually have the nerve to say that people of faith don't think for themselves.
*shakes her head sadly*

Answer 4

WARNING: This is probably going to be a long answer, and I sincerely hope it's worth it. I hope it makes the asker of the question think.

To start with, several answerers have already brought up historical writings which mention early Christians, and the existence of Jesus Christ. That there was once a man called Jesus of Nazareth, whom some called the Christ, is an historical FACT. And yes, there WAS a town called Nazareth. It was very small, perhaps a community of a couple hundred, so of COURSE there are no writings about Nazareth. Why would there be? But archaeologists DID uncover a small town that was exactly where it was written in the Bible.
"Nazareth! Can anything good come from there?" (John 1:46, NIV)

It's true that Josephus wasn't born until approximately four to five years after Jesus's death. However, that's not a very long time. It means that he would have grown up hearing about Jesus, even if it was in a derogatory manner. It also means that by the time he was of an age to start writing his books, many of the people who were witnesses to all that had happened would still be alive. It would be equivalent to someone who was born in 1967 writing a history of JFK, or at least mentioning the existence of JFK in one of their books.

In addition to contemporary secular writings which speak of Jesus, there are the Gospels. I know some people say that nothing written in the Bible can be considered reliable. I can understand that. However, nearly EVERYTHING ELSE written in the Gospels has been proven to be historical FACT. The location of towns, as well as the names of governors and prefects and where they were assigned was completely accurate.

Also, each and every account was written by people who said that they themselves witnessed these things! As a matter of fact, only TWO of the authors of books in the New Testament did NOT know Jesus personally: Luke, Paul's physician, who wrote Luke and Acts; and Paul, who wrote many of the others, including but not limited to Romans, 1 & 2 Corinthians, Ephesians, Galatians, and Philippians. However, both Luke and Paul knew several of Jesus's disciples, and they also spoke to other people who were witnesses to everything. Paul actually puts forth a challenge in one of his books, that if someone doesn't believe him, they should go ask one of the many others who witnessed everything that he had written as it happened, as many of them were still alive. Could that challenge have been given if none of it were true?

Apart from all that, though, the Gospels are considered important because of the fact that Jesus's existence was important enough to write down. The fact of the matter is, at that time, writing utensils were NOT easy to find. One couldn't just go down to the nearest supermarket and buy a pad of paper and a pack of pens. Therefore, even the most pertinent news was usually passed on by word of mouth.

Another key thing to remember is that Jesus's life was recorded by those who KNEW Him. Even the history of Alexander wasn't written until more than five hundred years after his death! And yet, THAT is considered more reliable than the Gospels! As if that wasn't enough, the author of the histories of Alexander did NOT die proclaiming that what he had written was true, unlike most of the authors of the New Testament.

There is more evidence to suggest that Jesus existed than there is of Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, and Homer. Yet no one tries to prove that Plato didn't exist! Why is that? Is it because his writings survive? Yes, a few dozen fragments that only date back to about fifteen hundred years after his death. Yet the Bible has more than twenty-four THOUSAND fragments still in existence, dating back to within less than a hundred years of Jesus's death. The ONLY ancient manuscript that comes close is Homer's Iliad and the Odyssey; there are about five hundred fragments still in existence, which date back to about nine hundred years of Homer's death. Yet what Homer (supposedly) wrote isn't in doubt! How do we know that he didn't write a mostly historical account of what happened in Troy, and all that mythical stuff wasn't added later?

The same standard which has been applied to all other ancient manuscripts has been applied to the Bible. Why is it that ANY doubt there is that Jesus existed ONLY came about in the last 150 years?

Would YOU die for something that you KNEW was a lie? Would you insist that you witnessed something that you really didn't, if it meant that you were going to be stoned, crucified, impaled, eaten by lions, or boiled alive? Would you intentionally lie about something you witnessed if it meant that you would be imprisoned, exiled, ostracized, or disowned by your family?

The fact is, many of the earliest Christians DID have all that I mentioned happen to them, and this is recorded in historical documents of the time.

The evidence for the existence of Jesus Christ is all there. There is more evidence for Him than there is for ANY other figure in that most ancient of history.

Answer 5

A case in point is the historicity of Jesus. Although many atheists state that Jesus never lived, He is mentioned by many contemporary, non-Christian historians. Let us look at the evidence.

Flavius Josephus, a first century Jewish historian wrote of Jesus and the Christians:

"so he [Ananus, son of Ananus the high priest] assembled the sanhedrin of judges, and brought before him the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others (or some of his companions) and when he had formed an accusation against them, he delivered them to be stoned." (8)

Other Jewish rabbinical writings, including Rabbi Eliezer and writers of the Talmud, talk about Jesus and his miracles. Surprisingly to many atheists, they never denied that miracles took place, but attempted to explain them as a result of evil (9). More information about Jesus in the Talmud can be found at Jesus Christ In The Talmud.

Cornelius Tacitus wrote about Jesus and the first century Christians in his Annals (a history of the Roman empire):

"Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus." (10)

Thallus, a Samaritan historian, wrote ca. 52 A.D. attempting to give a natural explanation for the earthquake and darkness which occurred at the crucifixion of Jesus. Mara Bar-Seraphon wrote a letter to his son in 73 A.D. which tells of the deaths of Socrates, Pythagoras, and of Jesus, "What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise king?...Nor did the wise king die for good; he lived on in the teaching which he had given." Jesus is also mentioned by Phlegon, a first-century historian, Lucian of Samosata (in The Passing Peregrinus), and Plinius Secundus, (Pliny the Younger).

Scholars have made statements such as, "no serious scholar has ventured to postulate the non-historicity of Jesus ." (11) The latest version of Encyclopedia Britannica says in its discussion of the multiple extra-biblical witnesses:

"These independent accounts prove that in ancient times even the opponents of Christianity never doubted the historicity of Jesus, which was disputed for the first time and on inadequate grounds by several authors at the end of the 18th, during the 19th, and at the beginning of the 20th centuries." (12)

Even the atheist H. G. Wells spoke of Jesus, "...one is obliged to say, "Here was a man. This part of the tale could not have been invented." (13)

Answer 6

Apparently, your uneducated? there is plenty of historic evidence of Jesus most Athiest will agree.

Answer 7

No historical evidence?? Says who? There is more than enough historical evidence - try Josephus, a Jewish historian, for starters.

Answer 8

Jesus did exist.There are numerous mentions of Jesus by historians and others.
Try Josephus for starters.

Answer 9

i think the bible anticipated that Israel might grow to be a rustic back and after 2000 years it did. i think the books of Isaiah and Daniel which grow to be dated one thousand to 500 years B.C. anticipated the demise of the Messiah. yet you haven't any longer seen something yet. the destiny will practice the bible actual truthfully.

Answer 10

I require Jesus to come to me and tell me everything about him is false and that he is no God.