Do we have any scientific proof that Jesus existed or is it just our faith?
81Sure, there's mountains of evidence for the historical life of a man named Jesus of Nazareth. (Interestingly enough, no one ever seems to have denied the historicity of Jesus until around the 18th or 19th centuries.) In particular, there were a number of writers in ancient Rome and Israel, who lived at the same time as Jesus or shortly thereafter, who wrote on the man-vs.-God controversy while it was first going on. I won't go through all of them, but here are a few notes:
Josephus
One of the most famous of these writers is Flavius Josephus, a historian born A.D. 37. A Pharisee, he commanded the Jewish forces fighting against their Roman conquerors in A.D. 66, and was captured when Galilee fell and Jerusalem was razed. In The Antiquities of the Jews, xviii.3.3, written around A.D. 93 or 94, he wrote:
"Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was the Christ, and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him; for he appeared to them alive again the third day; as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe of Christians so named from him are not extinct at this day."
An Arabic translation of this passage reads:
"At this time there was a wise man who was called Jesus. And his conduct was good, and (He) was known to be virtuous. And many people from among the Jews and the other nations became his disciples. Pilate condemned Him to be crucified and to die. And those who had become his disciples did not abandon his discipleship. They reported that He had appeared to them three days after his crucifixion and that He was alive; accordingly, He was perhaps the Messiah concerning whom the prophets have recounted wonders."
Tacitus
Another ancient historian was Cornelius Tacitus, born sometime between A.D. 52 and 57 (no one seems to agree on this). He was the Roman governor of Asia and the son-in-law of the governor of Britain, and to him we owe much of our knowledge of the Roman emperors, including Tiberius, Claudius, and Nero. In his Annals, first dating from around A.D. 117, he wrote:
"Christus, the founder of the name [Christians], was put to death by Pontius Pilate, procurator of Judea in the reign of Tiberius." Annals xv.44
Martyr
Justin Martyr, born A.D. 100 in Palestine, called himself a Samaritan but was probably of Greek or Roman ancestry. A well-educated philosopher, he studied the doctrines of Plato, Aristotle, Pythagoras, and the Stoics, but decided Christianity was the only philosophy that was "safe and profitable." When forced to defend his beliefs to the Emperor Antoninus Pius, he referred the emperor to the report written by Pontius Pilate at the time of Jesus' crucifixion for details of the incident--a report which Martyr presumed must have been on file in the imperial archives but which has unfortunately been lost through the centuries. Martyr, of course, was killed for his beliefs.
PrintShare it! — Rate it: up down flag this hub
Comments
It's absolutely true that Christianity only makes sense if Jesus Christ existed. Thankfully for Christians, there really can't be much doubt about that, at least.
Thanks for the invite. I'm heading to work now, but I'll check your Hubs tonight, David. See you then!
No problem!
Hi cherylthewriter I think all the evidence we need is all around us today common sence evidence interesting hub please come check my hubs out I also have a curiosity on the matter as well!
Also true, Paul Felix. But sometimes historical evidence matters more to people who don't trust their own senses.
Interesting hub! Lots of good information here, thanks.
You're welcome, stevemark122000. Glad you enjoyed it.
As a former atheist one of the things that challenged my intellectual honesty was the mountain of evidence (non-biblical) that is readily available. Good job, so much info well condensed and presented.
Thanks, jedgrey. The historical evidence really is overwhelming. We didn't even get into the archaeological part.
Cheryl, thanks for the hub on my request. Sorry for not responding early. I was off HP for a good 4 days.
To start with, I am not a non-believer. I just felt like knowing more if I am ever drawn in a debate with non-believers.
Let me congratulate you for the excellently prsented information in a very condensed style. I am sure to use these instances in future in my conversations. However, when I said scientific proofs, I actually meant archaeological, forensic and other such incidences. Personally, I am not a big believer in proofs recorded in historical books because as they say, "History is written by the winners". Still, I am not taking anything away from the historians or those who believe in them.
Can I request you to do a second hub with evidences that I am interested in? Will be looking forward to it eagerly. Thanks again for a superb hub.
In the case of the ancient Israelites and Romans, history was written by both the winners and losers, but what they wrote validates the existence of Jesus. The Romans defeated Israel in A.D. 66 and razed Jerusalem to the ground, killing thousands. That was when the nation of Israel ceased to exist, and it didn't reappear for 1900 years.
The Romans, and many of the "establishment" Israelites, including Josephus, did not believe in the divinity of Jesus, which is why their testimony concerning his historicity is so compelling. If nothing else, Jesus was crucified by the Romans--they had to believe in the fact of his existence, because they ended it. Only the Romans practiced crucifixion at that point in history.
These documents ARE scientific facts. At the time of history when they were first written, the event in question, the death of a man named Jesus of Nazareth, had happened less than one hundred years ago. That's rather like us discussing the death of, say, Queen Victoria of England, or Abraham Lincoln. We KNOW these people existed, so when we discuss them, we simply presume that fact. It was the same way with the ancient Romans and Israelites when they discussed Jesus. They didn't doubt his existence, only his divinity and sometimes his sanity.
If what you're saying is that these documents were rewritten by the Church during the medieval era, sorry, no, they weren't. I believe there are extant copies of these manuscripts that pre-date the rise of the Church. In the case of the Josephus text, note the Arabic (Muslim) translation, which has nothing to do with the Church.
Cheryl, wow... you are a powerhouse and knowledge bank on the topic. This was a real passionate comment - I can see, it came from within you.
Alright, I am not accusing the historians. I am just saying that I have more faith in archaeological and forensic evidences. Sometimes, ancient books are mysterious and people tend to derive multiple meanings of a particular phrase. I just wish it is not true for the evidences you have presented here.
Having said that, I still hope you will do a second hub on other evidences. Looking forward to it.
Honestly, I have more passion for history and historical evidence. I'm not certain if I truly qualify for being a Christian. But history . . . friend, that's a passion!
The archaeological evidence is more general than the documentary; it validates the historical background of the Bible, such as the locations of cities and when specific rulers governed certain areas, rather than the historicity of Jesus of Nazareth. I personally don't find it as convincing as the documentary stuff. When I find time, I'll get to it, but there's at least three or five Hubs in line first!
Sure Cheryl, I will wait for it.
By the way, what is your take on the miracles asoociated with Jesus? Could they be true or just fiction along with truth? To rephrase, if Jesus existed then how did he perform those miracles, because scientifically speking they are impossible. Again, I believe in Jesus, but I love to know the facts too.
Stooge, may I suggest a couple resources for you by former atheists Josh McDowell "Evidence that Demands a Verdict" or for an easier read, "More than a Carpenter;" and "A Case for Christ"... right now the author's name is eluding me...he used to be a reporter in Chicago...suppose if you google the title you'll find it or maybe Cheryl or a fellow hubber can help me out!
Found it, it's Lee Strobel who is the author of "A Case for Christ."
So Stooge, haven't you ever witnessed or heard testimony from someone you know regarding miracles? Jesus Christ is the same yesterday today and forever! There are followers of His that are - through the power of the Holy Spirit that lives in us who believe and receive - vessels through which miracles occur every day.....there are all kinds of medical doctors who have seen terminally ill patients miraculously recover and they can't explain it...it's because of people praying for healing. There isn't more media coverage on this because the world hates Jesus and doesn't want to see Him glorified. I have another book suggestion by an army chaplain who served in Iraq who witnessed bullet holes passing through soldiers helmets and no penetration to soldiers heads! The book is called, "A Table in the Presence." Check out Reinhard Bonnke who is an evangelist ministering in Africa - through him, God is raising people from the dead. When I was on tour in Israel, while we were in Jerusalem, one of my friends was feeling very ill and thought she was going to be spending the rest of our time there in her hotel room, or worse.....I layed my hands on her, began praying and commanded a spirit of infirmity to leave - in the name of Jesus Christ - and it lifted instantaneously and she continued on, full of joy and testifies about it to this day. Yes, miracles happen all the time and remember our battle is not one against flesh and blood, it's spiritual. Satan wants to steal kill and destroy those that God loves (everyone, but his attacks come hardest against those who minister in the name of Jesus Christ).
More Than a Carpenter is also Josh McDowell. A Case for Christ is by Lee Strobel, according to Amazon. There's also Jesus: The Evidence, by Ian Wilson, which is a tour of the documentary and archeological evidence, but it's a tough read and I admit lost me partway through.
Miracles, well, I don't currently HAVE a take on them, Stooge. That's one of many points I'm still considering, and I'm a slow thinker on theoretical subjects. All I can say at this point in time is that there's a lot of stuff that's supposedly impossible that happens every day. Did you know that aeronautically speaking, it's impossible for a bumblebee to fly?
Well... I am glad I kept the tone of my comments as challenging and that of a non-believer. Otherwise, I would not have got such great replies. Christine, your comment is a gem and I have even saved it in a diary. Probably many would just laugh off some of it (e.g. you commanded a spirit of infirmity to leave) but I am sure such miracles happen. The more I think over it, the more I get purturbed by the lack of one argument that can put end to all the doubts over the existence or greatness of Jesus. One argument, that comes good on all the fronts - technology, faith, history, forensic, archaeology - no loop hole anywhere. Something which is good enough for everybody - even the non believers.
Cheryl, I am surely going to read at least one of these. I dont why, but I have been thinking about this recently. And no, I did not know aeronautically speaking, it's impossible for a bumblebee to fly. I guess, that is one more reason why I SHOULD NOT trust only in scientific evidences.
Another interesting resource is the Reasons to Believe organization, a collection of PhDs who evaluate, compare, and contrast Christianity and science. Stooge, do a search.
Okay, I have to ask: what's your excellent reason?
Cheryl, great hub. You're probably going to hate me, so I won't be offended if you don't reply. I do not believe in God and abhor religion but, ironically enough, have never doubted the existance of Jesus of Nazareth. I mean, somewhere at the base of all the myth, exaggeration, and outright fibs, there's got to be someone, with a beautiful message, that started all this that actually existed.
So, I guess for me the challenge would not be to show proof that Jesus lived, but prove that he was the son of God... ANY god.
Constant Walker, with my own inherent lack of belief and distaste (not abhorrence) of religious controversy, I'll never throw stones and I'll certainly never hate you. With your interesting profile, you sound like a fascinating person; have you ever listened to Al Stewart music? Just out of curiosity.
Proving Jesus to be the son of God is something I haven't even managed to do with myself. As I find the theory of evolution to be laughable, I have to believe there's someone or some force out there that brought life into being. But as I commented to Stooge, with me, theory is a slow process, and I'll probably still be thinking on this topic when I'm hauled out of this world by my scruff.
Thanks for weighing in.
Thank you for the nice words: Wow, "interesting" and "fascinating"? Not sure I can live up to that. I've heard some of Al Stewart's music... decades ago. "Year of the Cat" was one of his hits, right?
Evolution is laughable to a lot of people, mainly religious, right? But, to me, it makes more sense than being created out of thin air by an all-powerful being, and it's the most intelligent (pun intended) theory I've heard so far... but that could change at any time. Science, contrary to popular belief, does not claim it's theories to be fact. Just the most reasonable explination to date.
Besides, if science WERE to suddenly accept the existance of God, your god, that is, it would only lead to more bothersome questions; "OK, so where did God come from, and what was here before Him? Why did he create the heavens and the Earth? What else has he created, and why? What is the Lord's Sun sign? Boxers or briefs, or does God go commando? Why won't he shave that unruly beard?"
The media would be all over it. Then, of course, Satan would want his 15 minutes...
I don't find evolution to be laughable on religious grounds, but on logical ones. Entropy as part of thermodynamics states that things don't come together, but rather fall apart. A junkyard is not going to assemble itself into a 747, no matter how many thousands of years you wait. Nor will pond sludge organize itself into complex biological processes.
Please read my comment to Stooge, above. I'm not a Christian and do not claim to believe in the Christian God. Not trying to start an argument here, but please don't put words into my mouth, or my computer. And please do not attempt to define MY God for me . . . I can't even do that for myself.
Again, thanks for weighing in.
My apologies. Assumed you were a Christian. I didn't read all of the above comments because ...they're long.
So, if you don't believe in evolution, or intelligent design, do you have a theory for how life on Earth came about?
No offense taken, Constant Walker. And no, I don't have any answers, any more than science. I just can't believe what we've got so far.
Another 2 cents. Faith and Science are suppposed to support one another, not be in opposition to one another. I do believe in micro-evolution, changes that occur based on adapting to ones environment. To say we evolved from apes is ludicrous...if that were true, why do any primates still exist today? Or to have evolved from pond scum.....well that sure does wonders for my self esteem! Oh, and are there any transitional fossils to support this type of evolution???
Constantwalker, I love your questions:
"OK, so where did God come from, and what was here before Him? Why did he create the heavens and the Earth? What else has he created, and why? What is the Lord's Sun sign? Boxers or briefs, or does God go commando? Why won't he shave that unruly beard?"
I can attempt to answer a few.
I believe God has always existed, nothing existed before Him (Read Genesis)
He created the Heavens and the earth for us, the heavenly hosts (angels) and of course for Himself because He is omnipresent and desires a relationship w/ every one of us.
Sun sign? Do you mean astrology? Not something that applies to God. In fact He speaks against it (along w/ witchcraft, spirit mediums and the like.... before Christ, when asked what my sign is, I used to say, "Sagitarrius" now I will say 'Jesus is my sign').
Boxers or briefs - LOL! You'll have to see for yourself if you can get an answer from him on that one! If you become His friend, he may tell you, depending on why you want to know (He's a friend to all of us, but it's a processional ladder of intimacy to reach the status where he actually calls us His friend!).
Shaving the beard....when Christ was on earth, as the visible image of the Father, mature men had facial hair in Jewish Culture. Many still do today.
Go commando? Oh He's not unfamiliar w/ battle and will return one day to lead for the ultimate, atop a white horse (this is in Revelation but not a book I encourage anyone to begin their search with!)
Bottom line, there is historical and archaelogical evidence to support Christ's claims. The problem is the distance between the head and the heart....not to say we aren't supposed to have intellect but it's over intellectualizing some things that really get in the way. Some things regarding God truly are mysterious...every individual has to search, seek and discover for themselves. The bible tells us that if one truly seeks God, He will reveal himself to them. I hope Stooge and whoever else here on hubpages chooses to pursue the truth (which will set one free!) will discover for themselves the heart of the Glorious One and the depth of His love. In attempts to comprehend His mind - remember how magnificient and vast He claims to be (which I for one know to be true!). His ways are higher.
Hello Cheryl, I liked your hub, but love the debate here in your comments! As a child I was taught Christianity, and now believe there were any number of positive, spiritual, miracle workers. Both before, and after Christ. Most religions have one or more God figure. The Son Of God label, is a great sales pitch, did Jesus call himself that? Or is He just called that in the 'His story' book, referred to as the Bible?
Gawn
C.S. Lewis, while still an atheist, said that Jesus was either a liar, a lunatic, or the son of God. It's an interesting perspective.
You know, the original question dealt with the historicity of Jesus, not the divinity, which I'm not qualified to address. This was never supposed to be a religious debate! (Not picking on you here, Gawn Fishin', just wondering where this is going next.)
This makes me think of the saying: Never discuss religion or politics. Everyone has a different opinion.
Thank you for your comment.
Cheryl, hope you don't mind. You're numbers have to be going up!
Was it Lewis or McDowell who said that? I think you may be mistaken.....
I agree w/ Gawn Fishin's comment about there being positive, spiritual and miracle working people prior to God's incarnation of himself through Christ.....in fact, there are several mentioned in the Bible.
Jesus referred to himself the most I believe as the Son of Man.....
History truly is "His story." What role are we all called to play??? He has a plan and a purpose for all of us.
I'm with Cheryl. The whole religious debate is tiresome, and the religious don't want to hear anything but what's quoted in the Bible, so how can there be discussion? As for fossil evidence of evolution: clearly you haven't looked or you wouldn't have asked that question. The fossil evidence of evolution -of ALL the Earth's flora and fauna, including Man- is in abundance. You've got the world at your fingertips, Christine, access it.
And personally, I think the Lord would be a "commando" guy. He's got the fancy flowing robe (how many of those things has he got, anyway?!), the heavenly breeze - why spoil it with anything?
Constant Walker, I'm not trying to argue with anyone, just share my perspectives based on my discoveries and things that have been revealed. People should be able to do so without hostility. If there is disagreement, agree to disagree and leave it at that.
Duh on my part about the commando thing! NOW I get what you were asking...you could be right.
Regarding the fossils, if you're making reference to neanderthal man (sp?? has been a while since I've looked into that topic so perhaps I need a refresher and will adhere to your suggestion... ) there is more than one suggested theory.
Christine, it was definitely Lewis. McDowell quotes (and paraphrases) his work, but the Oxford and Cambridge don was there first. Lewis pre-dates World War II, while McDowell dates from 1972.
And to be perfectly, squarely honest here, Constant Walker, I have to point out that evolutionists don't always want to see evidence which disproves their theories, either, even though they are only theories. The fossil evidence, like much evidence, can be interpreted in more than one way. The fact is, since no one was there to watch it happen, the what-came-first debate will probably never be really answered
Christine, I'm not wanting to argue either. If my comments gave you that impression, I apologize. I tend to express what I feel to be true and/or honest, not always as tactfully as I should. I have no patience for blowing smoke up anyone's dress... or pants. I think it comes with getting older, you know?
Cheryl, you're right, but the abundance of evidence can't be misintepreted by ALL of the scientists, geologists, etc looking at it, can it? There are definitely those who expect all scientists following in their footsteps to be "good Germans" and accept, without question, what has been established, but there is also always a new generation of scientists coming along and questioning everything. It is in this way that science is continually being updated, questioned, re-established, looked at in new light, with new tech, etc.
Christine, and not to be arguementative, but this is precisely the problem with religion - not just yours, any of them: it never has to prove itself. It only has to go on "faith" and "miracles." All those things which one can't really pin down...
And here we are again, debating religion. Ok, I'm done. Thanks for the discussion. It's been fun.
You're right, CW, it's been fun. Thanks for weighing in with some solid and heart-felt opinions. Even if I don't agree about scientists always questioning everything.
Constant Walker, it's all good. I too have a history of being challenged when it comes to tact. I hope you won't be offened by my next comment but early in my Christian walk, in the process of being discipled, I learned a "faith train" illustration that I try to be mindful of....the locomotive beng FACTS, the next car being FAITH and the caboose being FEELINGS. I'm not confident that I will say anything that will prove anything to you.....(reading the scriptures for yourself may have a surprising impact on you however if you approach it humbly). The books I mentioned earlier do a much better job than I and thus the reason for my suggesting them.
Thanks for the comments/exchanges and thanks Cheryl for responding to Stooges request.
Christine, you keep offering books from the Bible, but the content of that book (there were many, many more writings which were not included) was picked and chosen by men with an agenda. Even the books which were included, those you recommend, were written by men, thousands of years ago. As inspiring as it may be to you, it's not proof of anything. You know?
Anyways; We aren't going to convince each other of anything - but, the debate is stimulating, ay?
Religion is at best a thorny road. the debates being played out have been played out over many hundreds of years. As far as creation vs evolution is concerned this was the subject of a much publicised court case in the USA not to mention a couple of movies. Scientific evidence for both creation (Big bang theory, Choas theory Atomic theory) as well as evolution (fossils, Godwana theory of continental drift et al) exist, which does not help the debate. Remember religion is a question of faith and faith is just that.
There is no doubt that a prophet by the name of Jesus existed around AD 37 and there is plenty of evidence, scrolls documents (the so-called nag hammadi or dead sea scrolls) attest to that. But they, in turn, are the words of writers much like our hubs. So nobody can win this fight. we must each choose what we want to believe.
Great thought provoking hub!
Hello, sixtyorso, and thanks for weighing in.
The documents in question vary in their nature. Josephus and Tacitus were both historians and their works could be equated in nature with those written by Hubbers, although I for one would be SERIOUSLY flattered to find my poor little words included in such company! But Justin Martyr's words were more like testimony given in court or a deposition, not the same thing at all.
There are other documents I didn't mention, including references to Jesus in ordinary letters, written from one Roman to another, that have survived the centuries. Those aren't exactly the same sort of thing either.
The Nag Hammadi papyri, found around 1950 near the Egyptian town of that name, was a collection of fourth-century books, some bound with leather and some loose scraps. It included the Gospel of Thomas, a collection of 114 of Jesus' statements, as well as some later apocryphal works such as the Letter of Peter to Philip, the Apocalypse of Peter, and the Apocalypse of Paul. With the exception of the Gospel of Thomas, which dates to the second century, all of these are rather later works. The Dead Sea Scrolls, on the other hand, date from Jesus' lifetime and are a Hub in themselves.
Your point about the physical evidence being ambiguous is all too true, and when you say that each person must decide what to believe, well, I couldn't agree with you more. Thanks for your encouragement and comments.
Your commentary is great. well researched. I on the other hand work mostly from memory and my general knowledge but your comments are almost a new hub on their own.
If I ever finish the ones I'm working on, I just might go there. Thanks, sixtyorso!
"Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed." -John 20:29
Agreed, Angel. Unfortunately, there are so many of us who resemble Thomas more than the blessed.
Yes Cheryl. You are absolutely right. Now we live in a scientific world that look for proofs for each and everything..... All the things in the world cannot be seen and touched... There are somethings we should feel and believe... And the presence of God should be felt with heart....
Indeed there are such things, Angel. Again, it's easier to see than to believe.
I saw this on the request list and was going to respond, but I don't think I could do any better than what you've done here. One thing I've heard (but can't back up) is that we actually have more historical evidence for the resurrection Christ than we do for the assassination of Abraham Lincoln. I wish I had hard data for that!
This line of attack was recently adopted by Grant R. Jeffrey Ministries. Check it out at
http://www.grantjeffrey.com/article/criteria.htm
It's reeally long and I didn't have time to read all of it, so feel free to let me know your conclusions.
A lot of people seem to be confused as to what constitutes historical evidence as opposed to legal evidence. I'm thinking about doing a Hub on that.
This has certainly been a heated debate. But it all boils down to faith and what one believes.
I drive down the road and smash my car. The scientific man may say you were not concentrating. The religious man may say the lord has speared your life by saving you from a worst situating by delaying you with an accident. Which of the individuals makes me feel better and give me more courage to deal with the situation?
The scientific man and the religious man operate on too different realms one physical and one spiritual .
Ok guys check out the following web pages and tell me your opinions:http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/marshal Dont be shocked,thats the true,i believe in God that created people,not God that people created.
great hub...this is really informative and excellent explanation....thanx for sharing....
To all of you.
What difference does it make what we believe or not. In reality you choose what to believe or not. The only thing I could add to this is that I chose to belive and if I pray my prayers will be answered. A life was saved and spared although medical pracitioners have said it would be impossible for this person to survive. At first they said he would not survive, the next day they stated he would have severe brain damage, but the third day he miraculously were up and about. Jumping up and down with only the scars asfroof o what has happened. Today he is a master in mathematics. All because of what I believe. PRAYER. Many different events happened to me proving that GOD does exist and we should not argue about this. Make your own decisions base on what you desire to believe or not. Do your research for you will never find everything all the evidence supporting science, the Bible, Geology or anything else, for the curious mind will always question everything. Why do most people have a conscious. Because of an internal desire speaking to your heart comming from within you that you cannot explain. Placed there by a bigger power for mankind to question themselves.
IE. Search for the truth and the truth shall set you free.
According to my research the vast majority (f not all) of Josephus' writings have been confirmed to be forgeries. Check it out for yourself.
"Do we have any scientific proof that Jesus existed or is it just our faith?"
It's not your faith, it's the faith you were given.
Eph 2:8-9 (KJV) For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
Grace and faith are both gifts of God so that no man or woman can boast. Your faith earns you rewards stored in heaven, nothing else.
their was nothing that convinced me god is real on this page.
I am reminded of the old saying "arguing with a fool is like beating the air with a stick". I can no more "prove" that Jesus exsisted than anyone else can "prove" that He didn't. But I 100% BELIEVE that He did, and I have accepted Him as my Personal Savior! Those who do not believe in Him had better be "sure as Hell" that they are right! Excellent hub!
There's good reason why no one seems to question the existence of Jesus prior to the 18th century. Doing so could very well have gotten you imprisoned, banished, tortured, or killed.
I'm amazed at how many people take hearsay as the truth when it comes to the bible.
Josephus was born around 37 C.E., and didn't write Antiquities until around 93 C.E. This was after the first gospel was written - by someone who also was not there during this massive time of Jesus. So it's a historian retelling a story of a story.
Tacitus spoke of "Christus" or "The Christ". "Christ" is a title, not a name. It means "messiah," which does NOT mean "God" but just "God's chosen one." Historically, there were literally dozens of people who claimed to be the Christ in that period. And again, Tacitus witnessed none of this first hand, or even second hand. It's all stories told and retold.
As for Martyr... If someone were to do something absolutely atrocious then defend their actions by saying that there's PROBABLY a manuscript on file in the government archives that defends their actions, although nobody will ever actually produce evidence of this manuscript, they'd be locked away for a very long time. But that's what Martyr did. Claimed Pilate PROBABLY had a manuscript of the execution of Jesus in an archive, although it was NEVER actually produced. However, he was right about one thing. Christianity is indeed "safe" (because no one is allowed to question it) and most definitely "profitable."
These "witnesses" have no more witnessed the life and times of Jesus than I have witnessed Harry Potter. Actually, unlike any of the "witnesses" of Jesus (even the ones who wrote the bible), I was alive when Harry Potter was "born," actually making me a more credible "witness" than any of the aforementioned.
There is NO proof that Jesus ever existed that would stand up in a court of law. Period.
Wow, there was not one bit of archeological evidence that a man named Yeshua bar Yosef lived ever!!!
None of the "historians" were alive during the alleged life of Jesus.
Nothing was written by him or about him in his alleged lifetime.
That's why they call it Faith. It's all a mystery beyond the realm of scientific reasoning.
|
The Historical Jesus Of Nazareth (1876)
Price: $12.27
List Price: $19.95 |
AdsenseStrategies says:
2 years ago
Yes this is exactly right. It is my understanding that there is, relatively speaking, a mountain of evidence for the existence of Jesus.
This is not however so for all biblical figures. Anyone prior to Kings David and Solomon may have existed, but the extra-biblical evidence is not there (this does not mean they did not exist, only that they are only attested to by the Hebrew Scriptures and, much later, the Greek New Testament and the Qur'an.)
Up until recently it was more-or-less certain that David and Solomon existed (especially given that Solomon is said to have instigated the building of the first ever Great Temple to YHWH in Jerusalem), but of late doubt has even been cast on the non-biblical evidence for these two figures.
Interestingly, in New Testament scholarship, when it comes to Saint Paul, noone disputes his existence, but many scholars (most?) dispute that he wrote all of the letters attributed to him.
Ultimately I find it fascinating that Judaism, Christianity and Islam (their followers collectively referred to as The People of the Book) really rather need at least the major figures of the Bible (plus Mohammed) to have existed, in a way not perhaps true, for example for Buddhists and Buddha, as here it is the teachings themselves that are central (arguably this may be true for Mohammed and Muslims also). Technically, despite many varied ways of actually being Christian or Jewish in practice, on the other hand, Christianity without the existence of Jesus, or Judaism without the existence of Abraham, Moses and Jacob do not make much sense theologically speaking, as for these two groups, at least theoretically, their religion is based on a "salvation history" the details of which are quite important.
Well, that's my two cents worth. Come take a look at my own hubs if you feel like it.
David
http://hubpages.com/profile/adsensestrategies