Is any shred of evidence that Jesus actually lived?

Question

Do you take your belife totally on faith? Or do trust in the things you have read. Were do you find your information on Jesus?
Do you feel Jesus really walked the earth are do you feel he is just another story passed down in fokelore? Do you know of any proff of Jesus lived was human and walked the earth. Please tell me what you know.

Answer 1

Yes..yes I do accept Jesus on faith. But I also studied and searched out on my own for answers. As well as some people do not want to look to the bible as a historical fact. So I found other historical facts written by people that had nothing to do with the Christian movement.This is what I found. (someone asked a similar question, But even with the facts that I presented to him he still went to another person that really well..based his opinion as a fact.Others had great answers too. Dont get me wrong I do not care that he did pick an answer that suted his desire of the heart and felt that was right for him. I have taken allot of time to discover and study and want to share all I know. I am very happy to answer this question again)

But alot of people seem to forget that not only did we have the believers write about Jesus.. During that time they had also people who did not believe in Jesus works..

Remember Jesus really angered (who are we kidding he POed them)the Empire and it is to these accounts that are not fiction but actual "Historical" facts..Let us look at the group that lot of us Christians call the "HOSTEL" side.. Just for a moment.. Please let me indulge if I may...

As Christians it is so hard for so many to look outside the box of the realm to which many were taught. Fortunately, such questions can be answered by an honest appeal to the available historical evidence. Do any records exist to document the claim that Jesus Christ “intervened in the course of events” known as world history?Yes Yes they do. Indeed they do.
When I referred to Hostile people to Jesus I was of course referring to those who Hated Him. The people that mention him in a very negative light. They do not add to his creed or even that he was the Son of God But they did call him Messiah.. He was a thorn in the side of the Roman Empire.. Remember.. so we have a small group of historians that did document the man named Jesus the Messiah and his appointed men.

One was a man named..
1.Cornelius Tacitus (ca. 56 – ca. 117) was a senator and an historian of the Roman Empire.
2.Gaius Suetonius Tranquillus (c.71-c.135): Roman scholar and official, best-known as the author of the Lives of the Twelve Caesars.
3.Gaius Plinius Caecilius Secundus (63 - ca. 113), better known as Pliny the Younger, was a lawyer, an author and a natural philosopher of Ancient Rome.

Now these are not the Apostles of Jesus but these men were Officials of the Roman Empire. Since you do not want to belive as I do on just faith.But on a historians that mention Jesus the man. You are well sadly mistaken. Remember too Jesus was a man that started a new Religion.

Jesus was not just a small little leader in the community.. His crowds were sometimes in the thousands. Do you honestly think something like this would go unoted.Indeed it would not.

Tacitus(#1) He was a member of the Roman provincial upper class with a formal education who held several high positions under different emperors such as Nerva and Trajan.

"Nero fabricated scapegoats—and punished with every refinement the notoriously depraved Christians (as they were popularly called). Their originator, Christ, had been executed in Tiberius’ reign by the governor of Judea, Pontius Pilatus. But in spite of this temporary setback the deadly superstition had broken out afresh, not only in Judea (where the mischief had started) but even in Rome"
Tacitus hated both Christians and their namesake, Christ. He therefore had nothing positive to say about what he referred to as a “deadly superstition.” He did, however, have something to say about it. His testimony establishes beyond any reasonable doubt that the Christian religion not only was relevant historically, but that Christ, as its originator, was a verifiable historical figure of such prominence that He even attracted the attention of the Roman emperor himself!

Twice in his history, Suetonius (#2) specifically mentioned Christ or His followers. He wrote, for example:

“Because the Jews at Rome caused continuous disturbance at the instigation of Chrestus, he [Claudius—KB] expelled them from the city” (Claudius, 25:4; note that in Acts 18:2 Luke mentioned this expulsion by Claudius). Sanders noted that Chrestus is a misspelling of Christos, “the Greek word that translates the Hebrew ‘Messiah’” (1993, pp. 49-50). Suetonius further commented: “Punishments were also inflicted on the Christians, a sect professing a new and mischievous religious belief” (Nero, 16:2). Again, it is evident that Suetonius and the Roman government had feelings of hatred toward Christ and His alleged mischievous band of rebels. It is equally evident that Suetonius (and, in fact, most of Rome) recognized that Christ was the noteworthy founder of a historically significant new religion.
Last but not least Pliny the Younger (#3)
In approximately A.D. 110-111, Pliny was sent by the Roman emperor Trajan to govern the affairs of the region of Bithynia. From this region, Pliny corresponded with the emperor concerning a problem he viewed as quite serious. He wrote: “I was never present at any trial of Christians; therefore I do not know the customary penalties or investigations and what limits are observed”
He then went on to state: This is the course that I have adopted in the case of those brought before me as Christians. I ask them if they are Christians. If they admit it, I repeat the question a second and a third time, threatening capital punishment; if they persist, I sentence them to death (as quoted in Wilken, p. 4).Pliny used the term “Christian” or “Christians” seven times in his letter, thereby corroborating it as a generally accepted term that was recognized by both the Roman Empire and its emperor. Pliny also used the name “Christ” three times to refer to the originator of the “sect.” It is undeniably the case that Christians, with Christ as their founder, had multiplied in such a way as to draw the attention of the emperor and his magistrates by the time of Pliny’s letter to Trajan. In light of this evidence, it is impossible to deny the fact that Jesus Christ existed and was recognized by the highest officials within the Roman government as an actual, historical person.

I hope this finds you interested in finding out more for your studies..
These men mentioned did not write the Bible as we know it..Nor did they Love Jesus.They were infact reputable people.

Many believe that the reason the Bible was written some 20 years after Jesus death was because after his death. You would have to talk in silance and did not want the writtings distroyed..So the marking of the fish was born.. But thats another study all togeather.. Gods Blessing to you..
I pray all will seek,learn and discover the answers are out there one just has to know were to look

Answer 2

Jesus did actually walk the earth. As many other answerers have said, there is proof of this. However, that doesn't mean that he was special in any way. It is important to ask several questions when dealing with the subject of Jesus. First off, given the time that he was born in (and how the general society worked at the time), to believe that he was born to a virgin is absolute nonsense. Women were owned by men in that day. The only reasons they were around were to see to the man's needs for sex and food, and to tend the children. Second, it's important to think about the Jewish ways and traditions. In the Jewish faith, (and this is still true today, just as it was in his day), in order to be respected as a teacher in the Temples (as we know Jesus was thanks to the New Testament of the Bible), he would have had to be married. Most Christian religions teach that Jesus was never married. If that's true, how could anyone have respected him as a teacher in the Temples? They wouldn't be likely to bend the rules for one person. The Jesus that the Bible talks of, was in fact a heretic in the Jewish faith which was the faith of his birth. That's all he was. He was a danger to society, and that's why they crucified him. Just like any other heretic of the time.

Answer 3

There are historical accounts of Christ from non religious texts that talk about his life and mission. The Jewish historian Josephus wrote about him when discussing the early Christians in his account of the Roman-Jewish wars. Pliny the Younger wrote to the Emperor about his teachings from the followers he killed in Asia Minor. In addition the rate of travel for the scriptures was too fast for a myth story to take place. Before 200 AD parts of the Gospel of John were translated into Eqyptian and found along the Nile River. Typically it takes around 300- 400 years for a myth to take effect in the story telling. The pieces found were almost identical to what the Gospel of John says today as a testament to how well the actual document has been preserved. Also the 12 disciples of Christ were killed off, mostly in brutal ways and people do not die for what they know to be a lie, so that is a testament to the validity of the actual events happening.

Answer 4

After reading some answers as well. I think with the historical facts from the Roman Empire alone is proof..They are not religious people at all. And well some will find that more realistic as apposed to the Jewish community. I will be honest and say.. I never knew either.. So now we know he was a man and not a fictional Character..

Answer 5

Several first and second century scholars mention a great teacher.

I I read once that there is some record of the crucifixion of Yeshua. I don't think I believe that now.

I think Jesus was most likely an Essene Rabbi names Yeshua ben Yoseph. Paul used this man and added the story of Mithra to make Jesus Christ.

Answer 6

Nope. Read my answer here...

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AicxswnnkZ4fk1XTm76camXty6IX?qid=20070626201202AAqyVjO&show=7#profile-info-LX2T5yUwaa

Tell a Christian that Jesus isn't real and you will get the same stammering look of disbelief as when you tell a 4 year-old that Santa Claus isn't real.

And they usually have the same rebuttal. "If Santa Claus isn't real then who are are those elves at the North Pole really making toys for, huh?"

Christianity is NOT a religion that was "started" by any single event. Christianity instead was a completely natural progression that grew out of existing religions. Take 2 tablespoons of Judaism. Throw in some Greek Hellenism. A pinch of Egyptian mythology. A Zealot or two. Shake. And pour....

edit: Suzanne, the Palestinian Talmud was written between the 3rd and 5th century C.E., and the Babylonian Talmud was written between the 3rd and 6th century C.E. The mention of "Yeshua" in the Talmud means nothing. Yeshua was a common name, the account does not agree with the Gospels, and even if it was referring to "Jesus" it was only countering "claims by 3rd century Christians", not any historical evidence.

Answer 7

Yes there is, Sweet Pea:

Maybe you remember the story of Jesus walking incognito with two discouraged disciples from Jerusalem to Emmaus. He opened up the Old Testament prophecies concerning His mission, suffering and death.

Jesus fulfilled many prophecies, like being born of a virgin, born in Bethlehem of Epratath (the other was in Zebulum, so the prophecy spelled out the location of the city). He was to be killed on a cross, cry "my god, my god, why have you forsaken me." Enter Jerusalem on a donkey as people shouted hosannas, etc.

Probably the most significant prophecies were encoded numerically, and you can break the codes at http://abiblecode.tripod.com

Also, a first-century church historian, Josephus, mentions Jesus and His followers. But there is more:

The disciples who walked with Jesus appointed bishops to the churches they formed. Eusebius, a fourth-century historian had access to those, and writes about it, even listing the order of the Epistles they quoted, and his research is why we have the N.T. today and the books in the order of significance relating to how many times it was quoted.

More significant, at the url above, select chapter four and it shows how the O.T. predicted the exact year Jesus would be baptized and start His earthly ministry. It also shows much more; chapter one tells of His mission and identifies Antichrist.

Hope this info helps you.Blessings, Balaam

P.S.: There were many pictures of Jesus, and a lifesize bronze statue in Ceasarea, and one reproduction survives. View it at www.revelado.org/likeness.htm

Answer 8

No reputable historian doubts Jesus lived. The Jewish Talmud confirms He lived and performed acts of "sorcery." Roman officials mention Him. The writers of the Gospels and Epistles, who knew Him, write about Him.

Actually, there's more evidence that Jesus lived than there is evidence confirming our great-great grandparents lived.

Answer 9

There is not a shred. A burial box found a couple of years ago, supposedly with the name 'jesus' on it, was proved to be a fake.

Answer 10

The Bible is actually considered proof of the historical Jesus. It is a historical document and most scholars...religious and non-religious consider it evidence of the existence of Jesus as well as others.

Just because you do not believe in the divinity of Christ doesn't mean you should discount an important historical document like the Bible.

Answer 11

Nope, it's all based on hearsay. Even the accounts in Josephus have not been authenticated. He could have been writing about anyone named Jesus, a common name at the time. There is no evidence of the existence of Jesus the Christ. Zero, zilch, nada, none, zip.