Is there proof of Jesus' existence outside the Bible?

Question

Please no scripture. I am not asking from a religious perspective- rather from an historical one. I am not asking about Jesus as son of God, or his religious significance. I am asking purely whether there is historical proof that there really was a religious leader called Jesus about whom the Gospels are written.

Oh, and I'm atheist, in case anyone thinks I'm religious and need to be yelled at. I don't.

Answer 1

The first non-christian to mention Jesus was Josephus in 96 CE.

He was born in 36 CE (after Jesus supposedly died), and there are two passages he wrote that mention Jesus. Both are highly disputed for a number of reasons, but it is likely that Josephus mentioned Jesus in at least some manner. But, since no historians doubt that Christians existed by the 90's (Pauls letters and three gospels had already been written by then), it offers no weight as to whether or not Jesus actually existed.

Over the next few decades Christians are mentioned by Tacitus and a few other non-Christians, but again Christians already existed by then so it doesn't really matter.

Quite simply, there is not one account by ANYONE, Christian, Roman or otherwise that references Jesus while he was alive.

The first Christian writing (Paul) arrives about 20 years later, but Paul never met Jesus. As mentioned above, the first non-Christian mention doesn't appear for another 45 years or so after Paul.

EDIT:

The Pontius Pilate reference is a well-known hoax.

Answer 2

The Bible proves nothing about his being a real person any more than the "Harry Potter" novels prove harry Potter is real. There is no proof anywhere that Jesus existed. I see someone gives a long list of people who mentioned him, but none of these sources actually prove Jesus existed. Skeptics have shown that none of them are reliable. Anyone who offers such a list only hurts his own case. If he had any valid proof, he would certainly offer it, rather than these refuted ones. The account in Josephus' history has been shown to be a much later forgery by Christan monks who copied the work. Some sources, e.g. Pliny the Younger, only mention Christians, but there is no doubt they existed.

Answer 3

Check out Ed T Martin's book "King of Travelers - Jesus Lost Years in India" which follows his trail after the crucifixion. Yes - there is a historical trail that Christianity is blissfully unaware of.
Also the British documentary "Did Jesus Die?" which covers similar ground to the above - and takes the viewer to Kashmir, where the tomb of Jesus is.
It is the same idea as 'The Talmud Jmmanuel' text, although the documentary doesn't mention this text at all.

Answer 4

Try the Shroud of Turin.

This, from a man who says about himself: "I trust science. I did then, and more than ever, I do now. " and who says the first time he heard about the shroud being Jesus' burial cloth he LAUGHED...

First he thought it was a negative:

"I knew something about the subject of negatives. But rather than marveling at this fact, I doubted it. I was so convinced that the Shroud of Turin was a fake that I doubted the images were negatives. I had to see for myself.

I was certain that no artist, no craftsman, no faker of relics, could possibly paint a negative of a human face. To do so is like trying to write your signature upside down and backwards. Our minds are programmed for the way we see things in the world; a world where black is black and white is white. It is relatively easy, with talent and training, to paint a picture of what we see in the world. And an artist, if he is imaginative, like Picasso, can alter that perception in stylistic ways. But the one thing he can not easily do is to perfectly reverse black and white and all the darker and lighter shades of grey while painting a face.

But imagine, for just a moment, that he could. How would he know he had done it correctly without technology to test his results? A more profound questions is why? In an age so undemanding as the medieval, when any sliver of wood could pass as a piece of the "true cross" and any bramble as a piece of the "crown of thorns," why bother?"

And after a year of extensive study he says:

"Starting in 2003, new evidence began to appear in secular, peer-reviewed, scientific journals that supported the Shroud of Turin's authenticity. From these journals we learn that the outermost fibers of the cloth are coated with a layer of starch fractions and various saccharides. In places, the coating has turned into a caramel-like substance, thus forming the images. This suggests a chemical reaction took place. We learn, also, of a faint second image of the face on the backside of the cloth. The second face supports the idea of a chemical reaction and adds more proof that the image is not a work of art or a photograph. And in 2005, we learned that the carbon 14 dating was flawed. In fact we learned that the cloth could very well be 2000 years old."

Answer 5

Yes, Josephus to name one source.

The Rabbinical writings (e.g. Talmud, Midrash)--BOTH make clear references to the existence of Jesus.

Plus the Jewish leaders in the time of Jesus, never denied that Jesus existed, what allot of them denied was the Claims that Jesus made.

Most scholars in the fields of biblical studies and history agree that Jesus was a Jewish teacher from Galilee who was regarded as a healer, was baptized by John the Baptist, was accused of sedition against the Roman Empire, and on the orders of Roman Governor Pontius Pilate was sentenced to death by crucifixion. A very small minority argue that Jesus never existed as a historical figure, but was a purely symbolic or mythical figure syncretized from various non-Abrahamic deities and heroes.

Answer 6

There is not much question about the existance of Jesus. There is plenty of evidence. The real question as whether or not Jesus was the Messiah. The latest claim to that title was Rabbi Schneerson, the late leader of the Lubavitch movement of Judaism. Schneerson very definitely existed and made a mark Judaism. Now the question as to whether he was the messiah is of extreme controversy.

Answer 7

The problem is that Christians actively engaged in adding in references to Jesus well after the fact. The reference by Josephus was thought to be added later by someone else. Since the original documents no longer exist no one really knows.

Answer 8

the bible and the purpose of it is as follows... the spirit contains a lot of information and with that is some prophecy.. the bible was introduced as a series of plans to circumvent prophecy... meaning natural expected outcome of events... by destroy these prophecies the catholic church has change the path of human evolution... the reason that the story of both eve and jesus are still on the books so to speak is because these are the prophecies next set to be destroyed... if we look back at the catholic bibles there should be an evolution of plans in them... all scripture having acts of violence, murder and war is a plan to destroy prophecy... so this Jesus isn't a historical figure but a prophetic figure... same as eve actually... but by introducing them as historical already the human mind set is against them... for example... lets go with the prophetic information... Jesus (representing a specific man, not named Jesus.. now he's to come and give the world information that would destroy religion... and give the human race missing information on spirituality, science and nature... even human behavior and medical and healing understanding... lets say this man shows up tomorrow... and his information..... the over whelming christian opinion.. the same reception they've given evolution.... and they call this man a savior... what is he saving the world from? the religious lies that have kept the human race ignorant and slaves for centuries..... you see how either way he's set up... eve.. same story... but a little clearer... she eats of the symbolic tree.. knowlege of good and evil.... who stands to loose if humanity gains the knowlege of good and evil... good or evil? now to help put it in context, over time a human conscience evolved denoting right from wrong... by this time the human race has been bombarded with religious intimidation and dogma... but as we grow we began to notice that good and evil defined by the church was usually opposite to right and wrong..... so the church has a lot to loose if either of them reach the humans with information...

Answer 9

as far as i can find out, and i've looked hard ,there are no reliable direct references to jesus as existing individual outside of the bible. there are references to christians by romans but not to jesus as an existing person. if the biblical jesus was to be recorded anywhere it should be in the talmud. there are references to two people with the name jesus but i don't think that any christian would want to claim them.

Answer 10

The Jewish historian Josephus writes of Jesus in his Chronicals of the Jewish revolts aginst the Romans. Pope Clement talks of Jesus in 96 AD. I think there is Roman grafiti making fun of Jesus and misnaming, Crestus. There is alot of of extrabiblical support I just can't gather it all up right now.