Historical evidence Of Jesus?

Question

Proving anything to 100% certainty is nearly impossible. With this in mind, if atheists can't except the historical evidence of Jesus the Christ, Then who can prove George Washington was not a mythical figure, with historical documents forged and invented, in a conspiracy to help a new country?

Answer 1

Absolutely correct.
There is far more evidence for the existence of Jesus than for most other ancient historical figures. More documents from the first century mention Jesus than not. No credible scholars question the existence of Jesus, if for no other reason than we would then have to question the existence of 90% of the ancient world.

Answer 2

Jethro Bodine! That's cute. I'm a Christian, btw

Your analogy is flawed because we have correspondence written to and from George Washington in his own hand, we have the house he lived in and the articles of property he owned. There's ample evidence that GW lived -- too much to have been forged (hey, Valley FORGE!! Maybe you are on to something after all). Also extant are contemporary portraits of GW.

The evidence proving Christ's existence, while some does exist, is almost all second hand at best -- it wouldn't, as they say, "hold up in court." That in no way proves he did not exist -- in his day he had only a very small group of followers, and under the political system of the time, there would be no reason for all-powerful Rome or anyone else at the time to write about what they considered a small-time criminal -- they had no idea of the impact Jesus would have on the world.

Answer 3

If I remember correctly there is somewhere in the neighborhood of 8 to ten note worthy secular accounts of Jesus. Some of them have been disputed by atheists, but the consensus from the historical point of view is that Jesus definitely existed. There have been few "historians" that have decided otherwise, although a "few" have. I have noticed lately that the most popular attacks against the historicity of Jesus actually usually come from people who have no history credentials. Anyway, off the top of my head, I would say Tacitus, Josepheus, Pliny, and The Jewish Talmud (a very interesting one, from a Jewish orthodox perspective that were not fans of Jesus/ they discussed him wroughting mysterious powers and the such) Other outside of the bible sources include numerous christian letters, of everyday lay people who were 'everyday' christians. Also we must keep in mind as well that we can not discount the 4 gospels just because they are in the Bible. Most of the time we actually look closer at those who claim to be eye witnesses. Of course we can choose to ignore them and say they are biased, but we ALL are biased. The Jewish people during the holocaust were biased, but that doesn't mean they were lying. Atheist too, are biased. They love to look for and hear all kinds of opinions that verify their own opinion, and discount anything that is contrary. We all are biased. We must remember that history also dictates that the authors of the bible were murdered for their beliefs as well as thousands and thousands of less famous christians under the hands of several authorities during the decades that followed Christ's death. The disciples did not gain wealth or power, however they did gain beatings, imprisonment, and death. These authors of the bible we call bias, we must ask ourselves why were they willing to die for something they knew was a lie because they would have had to have invented the story. Unless, it wasn't a lie. Also one other line of argument. No one denies historically that the Romans as well as the Jews for a good while (until Constantine some 3 centuries later) wanted nothing more than for the pesky superstition of christianity to go away. Why do we not have one account of someone saying that they were all just lying. If Jesus didn't exist, obviously the powers that be wanted people to stop believing in him, why didn't hundreds of people stand up and cry, you people are crazy, he never existed. You will not find any historical document with that cry until some 5 or 6 centuries later. Most historians, even those who are not christians will acknowledge the life as well as the death of Jesus Christ, as well as the profound movement after his death. God bless always. seek and you will find, knock and it will be opened.

Answer 4

I don't really think that all atheists necessarily believe that there was no Jesus. Atheism is more about the lack of belief in a god...you know, in heaven and such.

I believe in George Washington, but you don't have to if you don't want to.

Good Luck.

Answer 5

I'm an atheist that accepts that Jesus was a real and cool guy. The historical Jesus is actually accepted in a lot of academic communities. His divinity, though, is a whole different story. That's where you and I can agree to disagree, I think.

Answer 6

For the second time tonight, Connolly is one sweet atheist. This is a documented fact. Thumbs up for her and the atheist above me.

Answer 7

For christ there is not enough evidence to " get a piss ant around the inside of a cheerio. " For Washington the evidence is overwhelmingly corroborated.

Answer 8

Good point. After Jesus' violent and painful death, his followers went into hiding, then came out and preached that Jesus was God's son. Why would they risk the painful death of their savior?

Answer 9

No one can prove George Washington existed, and he was probably made up too.

Answer 10

Precisely. Anyone who denies that fact that Jesus Christ existed is just plain brutish.