Did the Biblical Jesus exist?

[Medjai]

What evidence is there for Christ's existence? The earliest non-Christian reference occurs in Josephus' Antiquities of the Jews (A.D. 93?) :

At the time lived Jesus, a holy man, if man may be called, for he performed wonderful works, and taught men, and joyfully recieved the truth. And he was followed by many Jews and many Greeks. He was the Messiah.

There may be a genuine coe in these strange lines; but the high praise given to Christ by a Jew uniformly anxious to please either the Romans or the Jews --- both at that time in conflict with Chritianity --- renders the passage suspect, and Chritian scholars reject it as almost certainly an interpolation. There are references to "Yeshu'a of Nazareth" in the Talmud, but they are too late in date to be certainly more than counterechoes of Christian thought.

The oldest known mention of Christ in pagan literature is in a letter of the younger Pliny (ca. 110), asking the afdvice Trajan on the treatment of Christians. Five years later Tacitus described Nero's persecution of the Chrestiani in Rome, and pictured them already (A.D. 64) numbering adherents throughout the Empire; the paragraph is so Tacitean in style, force, and predudice that of all Biblical critics only Drews queations its authenticity.

Suetonius (ca. 125) mentions the same persecution, and reports Claudius' banishment (ca. 52) of "Jews who, stirred up by Christ [impulsore Chresto], were causing public disturbances," the passage accords well with Acts of the Apostles, which mentions a decree of Claudius that "the Jews should leave Rome." These references prove the existence of Christians rather than Christ; but unless we assume the latter we are driven to the improbable hypothesis that Jesus was invented in one generation; moreover, we must suppose that the Christian community in Rome had been established some years before 52, to merit the attention of an imperial decree.

About the middle of this first century a pagan named Thallus, in a fragment preserved by Julius Africanus, argued that the abnormal darkness alleged to have accompanied the death of Christ was a purly natural phenomenon and coincidence; the argument took the existence of Christ for granted. The denial of that existence seems never to have occured even to the bitterist gentile or Jewish opponents of nascent Christianity.

The Chritian evidence for Christ begins with the letters ascribed to Saint Paul. Some of these are of uncertain authorship; several, antedating A.D. 64, are almost universally accounted as substantially genuine. No one has questioned the existence of Paul, or his repeated meetings with Peter, James, and John; and Paul enviously admits that these men had known Christ in the flesh. The accepted epistles frequently refer to the Last Supper and the crucifixion.

Matters are not so simple as regards the Gospels. The four that have come down to us are survivors from a much larger number that once circulated among the Christians of the first two centuries. Our English term gospel (Old English godspell, good news) is a rendering of the Greek euangelion, which is the opening word of Mark, and means "glad tidings" --- that the Messiah had come, and the Kingdom of God was at hand. The Gospels of Mathew, Mark, and Luke are "synoptic": their contents and episodes allow of being arranged in parallel columns and "viewed" together."

They were writen in the Greek koine' of popular speech, and were no models of grammar or literary finish; never the less, the directness and force of their simple style, the vivid power of their analogies and scenes, the depth of their "feeling," and the profound fascination of the story they tell give even the rude originals a unique charm, immensely enhanced for the English world by the highly inaccurate but lordly version made for King James.

Despite the prejudices and theological preconceptions of the evangelists, they record many incidents that mere inventors would have concealed --- the competition of the apostles for high places in the Kingdom, their flight after Jusus' arrest, Peter's denial, the failure of Christ to work miracles in Galilee, the references of some auditors to his possible "insanity," his early uncertainty as to his mission, his confessions of "ignorance" as to the future, his moments of bitterness, his despairing cry on the cross; no one reading these scenes can doubt the reality of the figure behind them was a real man like any other, existed and was not invented. -Kiang

 

[mrwitch]

But, is not "Christ" simply a title? Anointed one. Or the anointed.

The problem I and others have with ancient writings, is it's translations from it's original language, to other languages. Particularly... English.

Words can be corupted in translation, as it is with the name Jesus, which in the greek is... Joshua. And in the original biblical prophecy, was not the messah to have the name "emanualle?"

And again, the bible itself, is a translation from the original language. There are many words in the enlish language which can not conform to other languanges.

And in the writings of Josephus, many write it off as a fraud. From what I understand about this passage, nobody noticed it unil about 342 CE, by Pope Clement I do believe.

You would think, that a passage that significant, would had been mentioned earlier. There are many scholars who are of the belief, that Jesus Christ, is more or less a metaphor, pertaining to a group of people who roamed the region, preaching a new train of spiritual thought.

If there was a Jesus Christ, I would say the biggest mistake he made, was not writing down what he was preaching. There is no writings from a person named Jesus Christ. His story and teachings were written down by others. And it wasn't written untill hundreds of years after his death. Supposedly.

That's another problem I have, with the bible and that of Josephus, is that they are secondary sources, and questionable secondary sources... at that. Then there is Saint Paul, who really never met Jesus Christ. He was not a deciple, a misconception held by many.

Plus, it would seem that everything Paul said, was the exact opposite of what Jesus Supposedly preached. Here's a link concerning Paul: http://www.factology.com/paul/index.htm

I believe further, more substantial evidence is required, to the actual existence of Jesus Christ.

 

[Ultima Avatar]

So are you saying Christ of the Bible lived or did not live, Medjai? It seems to be you are merely writing up what several sources have said in regards to the aspect, and they seem to be in general agreement with one another.
The Man Christ lived. But did the God Christ live? Is that what you're asking or is that not even part of this at all? Are you even asking anything?
And welcome, Mrwitch.

 

[CCGR]

they found this ossirary late last year..pretty substantial.
http://www.gnmagazine.org/issues/gn44/proof.html

other ossiraries for Pontius Pilot and Caiphus have been found to oadding validity for the Bibal as a historical reference

Manuscript Evidence for the Bible

Reliability of the New Testament as Historical Documents

"Astounding" number of ancient manuscripts extant: 5,000 Greek manuscripts, 10,000 Latin and 9,000 other--totaling over 24,000 manuscript copies or portions of the New Testament. These are dated from 100 to 300 years after the originals. (There are no original manuscripts ["autographs"] extant, but the number and similarity of copies allows scholars to reconstruct the originals.)
Early fragments: John Ryland manuscript 130 A.D. in Egypt; Bodmer manuscript containing most of John 150-200 A.D.; Magdalen fragment from Mat. 26 believed by some to be within a few years of Jesus' death; Gospel fragments found among the Dead Sea Scrolls dated as early as 50 A.D.
Comparison with other ancient documents (available copies versus the originals):
Caesar -- 10 copies -- 1000 year gap
Tacitus -- 20 copies -- 1000 year gap
Plato -- 7 copies -- 1200 year gapF. F. Bruce: "There is no body of ancient literature in the world which enjoys such a wealth of good attestation as the New Testament."
William F. Albright: "Thanks to the Qumran discoveries, the New Testament proves to be in fact what it was formerly believed to be: the teaching of Christ and his immediate followers circa.25 and circa. 80 AD."

Quotations from Early Church Fathers:

Clement of Rome (a disciple of the apostles) cited Matthew, John, and 1 Corinthians in 95 to 97 A.D. Ignatius (who knew the apostles well) referred to six Pauline Epistles in about 110. Polycarp (disciple of apostle John) quoted from all four Gospels, Acts, and most of Paul's Epistles from 110 to 150. Taitian's harmony of the Four Gospels completed in 160 A.D. Irenaeus (who apparently heard the apostles) quoted from Matthew, John, Acts, and 1 Corinthians in 160 A.D.
Of the four Gospels alone, there are 19,368 citations by the church fathers from the late first century on. Even if we had no manuscripts, virtually the entire New Testament could be reconstructed from these quotations. This argues powerfully that the Gospels were in existence before the end of the first century, while some eyewitnesses (including John) were still alive.

Primary Source Value

Testimony of the New Testament authors themselves: Luke 1:1-3, 3:1, John 21:24; Acts 26:24-26, 2 Peter 1:16; 1 John 1:3.
John A.T. Robinson's argument for early date for the Gospels (before 70 A.D., the destruction of Jerusalem). Though the Gospels include prophecies of such a destruction, they are prophetic stock-in-trade. These prophesies lack any details that certainly would have been added if written after this important historical event.
Substantial other evidences of New Testament being written between 40 and 60 A.D. See Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics.

Reliability of the Old Testament

Jewish scholars performed "unbelievable" care in copying and preserving Scripture.
The Dead Sea Scrolls discovered in 1947 are dated from the third century B.C. to the first century A.D. These manuscripts predate by 1000 years the previous oldest manuscripts. They represent every Old Testament book except Esther (as well as non-biblical writings). There is word for word identity in more than 95% of the cases, and the 5% variation consists mostly of slips of the pen and spelling.

http://www.jesusisreal.org/index.htm

 

[mrwitch]

I'm sorry, but that burial box has already been deemed a fraud. That box was in a private collection for several years, and the writings on the plate, are of 2 different styles. It was obvious that the box was tampered with, or doctered while in the the possesion of the private collection.

You're Jesus is real dot org web site, is also not presenting any substantial evidence. Ron Wyatt has found some interesting things, unfortunately, his findings are filled with a lot of what if's, and could be's.

He is basing his finds, on his own "passions" and also, what he claims god told him where to look. Who else, other than Ron Wyatt, was told by god where to look?

I think it would be nice, if god would present himself, to a number of people at the same time. Rather than playing hide and seek, with just a single individual, as god tends to do.

 

[timor]

Yeah, I'm still undecided as to whether Jesus actually existed, even simply in human form. However, it appears that Kiang, who wrote that article (and is an atheist), has decided that he did live. That's cool, that's what freethought is all about.

Just a quick note, though - as witch said, that ossuary has been proven to be fake. Check out the latest issue of Archaeology magazine (or it may have been last month's..not sure) for the details on the uncovering of both that and the tablets that echo the Old Testament passage.

 

[CCGR]

thanks for the heads up on the ossuary i'll look in to that.  Jesus did show himself to multitudes of people when he walked this earth.  Thousads listened to him preach.  over 500 wittnesssed his ressurection.

EDIT- found the article saying it's fake...last I heard it was damaged but know I know it's been tampered with

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/science/06/18/jesus.box/

 

[CCGR]

Non Biblical references to Jesus' resurrection (must have been here to resurect right?)

Extra-Biblical Historical Evidence for
the LIFE, DEATH, and
RESURRECTION of JESUS


ANCIENT NON-CHRISTIAN SOURCES


Cornelius Tacitus (55-120 AD), "the greatest historian" of ancient Rome:

"Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. 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, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. Nero offered his gardens for the spectacle, and was exhibiting a show in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who deserved extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of compassion; for it was not, as it seemed, for the public good, but to glut one man's cruelty, that they were being destroyed."





Gaius Suetonius Tranquillas, chief secretary of Emperor Hadrian (117-138 AD):

"Because the Jews of Rome caused continous disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, [Claudius] expelled them from the city."

"After the great fire at Rome [during Nero's reign] . . . Punishments were also inflicted on the Christians, a sect professing a new and mischievous religious belief."





Flavius Josephus (37-97 AD), court historian for Emperor Vespasian:

"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 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." (Arabic translation)





Julius Africanus, writing around 221 AD, found a reference in the writings of Thallus, who wrote a history of the Eastern Mediterranean around 52 AD, which dealt with the darkness that covered the land during Jesus's crucifixion:

"Thallus, in the third book of his histories, explains away the darkness as an eclipse of the sun--unreasonably, as it seems to me." [A solar eclipse could not take place during a full moon, as was the case during Passover season.]





Pliny the Younger, Roman governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor around 112 AD:

"[The Christians] were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food--but food of an ordinary and innocent kind." Pliny added that Christianity attracted persons of all societal ranks, all ages, both sexes, and from both the city and the country. Late in his letter to Emperor Trajan, Pliny refers to the teachings of Jesus and his followers as excessive and contagious superstition.





Emperor Trajan, in reply to Pliny:

"The method you have pursued, my dear Pliny, in sifting the cases of those denounced to you as Christians is extremely proper. It is not possible to lay down any general rule which can be applied as the fixed standard in all cases of this nature. No search sould be made for these people; when they are denounced and found guilty they must be punished; with the restriction, however, that when the party denies himself to be a Christian, and shall give proof that he is not (that is, by adoring our gods) he shall be pardoned on the ground of repentance, even though he may have formerly incurred suspicion. Informations without the accuser's name subscribed must not be admitted in evidence against anyone, as it is introducing a very dangerous precedent, and by no means agreeable to the spirit of the age."





Emporer Hadrian (117-138 AD), in a letter to Minucius Fundanus, the Asian proconsul:

"I do not wish, therefore, that the matter should be passed by without examination, so that these men may neither be harassed, nor opportunity of malicious proceedings be offered to informers. If, therefore, the provincials can clearly evince their charges against the Christians, so as to answer before the tribunal, let them pursue this course only, but not by mere petitions, and mere outcries against the Christians. For it is far more proper, if anyone would bring an accusation, that you should examine it." Hadrian further explained that if Christians were found guilty they should be judged "according to the heinousness of the crime." If the accusers were only slandering the believers, then those who inaccurately made the charges were to be punished.





The Jewish Talmud, compiled between 70 and 200 AD:

"On the eve of the Passover Yeshu was hanged. For forty days before the execution took place, a herald went forth and cried, `He is going forth to be stoned because he has practised sorcery and enticed Israel to apostacy. Anyone who can say anything in his favour, let him come forward and plead on his behalf.' But since nothing was brought forward in his favour he was hanged on the eve of the Passover."

[Another early reference in the Talmud speaks of five of Jesus's disciples and recounts their standing before judges who make individual decisions about each one, deciding that they should be executed. However, no actual deaths are recorded.]





Lucian, a second century Greek satirist:

"The Christians, you know, worship a man to this day--the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account. . . . You see, these misguided creatures start with the general conviction that they are immortal for all time, which explains the comtempt of death and voluntary self-devotion which are so common among them; and then it was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws. All this they take quite on faith, with the result that they despise all worldly goods alike, regarding them merely as common property." Lucian also reported that the Christians had "sacred writings" which were frequently read. When something affected them, "they spare no trouble, no expense."





Mara Bar-Serapion, of Syria, writing between 70 and 200 AD from prison to motivate his son to emulate wise teachers of the past:

"What advantage did the Athenians gain from putting Socrates to death? Famine and plague came upon them as a judgment for their crime. What advantage did the men of Samos gain from burying Pythagoras? In a moment their land was covered with sand. What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise king? It was just after that that their kingdom was abolished. God justly avenged these three wise men: the Athenians died of hunger; the Samians were overwhelmed by the sea; the Jews, ruined and driven from their land, live in complete dispersion. But Socrates did not die for good; he lived on in the teaching of Plato. Pythagoras did not die for good; he lived on in the statue of Hera. Nor did the wise king die for good; he lived on in the teaching which he had given."





GNOSTICS SOURCES



The Gospel of Truth, probably by Valentius, around 135-160 AD:

"For when they had seen him and had heard him, he granted them to taste him and to smell him and to touch the beloved Son. When he had appeared instructing them about the Father. . . . For he came by means of fleshly appearance." Other passages affirm that the Son of God came in the flesh and "the Word came into the midst. . . . it became a body."

"Jesus, was patient in accepting sufferings. . . since he knows that his death is life for many. . . . he was nailed to a tree; he published the edict of the Father on the cross. . . . He draws himself down to death through life. . . . eternal clothes him. Having stripped himself of the perishable rags, he put on imperishability, which no one can possibly take away from him."





The Aprocryphon of John, probably by Saturninus, around 120-130 AD:

"It happened one day when John, the brother of James,--who are the sons of Zebedee--went up and came to the temple, that a Pharisee named Arimanius approached him and said to him, `Where is your master whom you followed?' And he said to him, `He has gone to the place from which he came.' The Pharisee said to him, `This Nazarene deceived you with deception and filled your ears with lies and closed your hearts and turned you from the traditions of your fathers.'"





The Gospel of Thomas, probably from 140-200 AD:

Contain many references to and alleged quotations of Jesus.





The Treatise On Resurrection, by uncertain author of the late second century, to Rheginos:

"The Lord . . . existed in flesh and . . . revealed himself as Son of God . . . Now the Son of God, Rheginos, was Son of Man. He embraced them both, possessing the humanity and the divinity, so that on the one hand he might vanquish death through his being Son of God, and that on the other through the Son of Man the restoration to the Pleroma might occur; because he was originally from above, a seed of the Truth, before this structure of the cosmos had come into being."

"For we have known the Son of Man, and we have believed that he rose from among the dead. This is he of whom we say, `He became the destruction of death, as he is a great one in whom they believe.' Great are those who believe."

"The Savior swallowed up death. . . . He transformed himself into an imperishable Aeon and raised himself up, having swallowed the visible by the invisible, and he gave us the way of our immortality."

"Do not think the resurrection is an illusion. It is no illusion, but it is truth. Indeed, it is more fitting to say that the world is an illusion, rather than the resurrection which has come into being through our Lord the Savior, Jesus Christ."

". . . already you have the resurrection . . . why not consider yourself as risen and already brought to this?" Rheginos was thus encouraged not to "continue as if you are to die."





LOST WORKS QUOTED IN OTHER SOURCES



Acts of Pontius Pilate, reports sent from Pilate to Tiberius, referred to by Justin Martyr (150 AD):

"And the expression, `They pierced my hands and my feet,' was used in reference to the nails of the cross which were fixed in His hands and feet. And after he was crucified, they cast lots upon His vesture, and they that crucified Him parted it among them. And that these things did happen you can ascertain the `Acts' of Pontius Pilate." Later Justin lists several healing miracles and asserts, "And that He did those things, you can learn from the Acts of Pontius Pilate."





Phlegon, born about 80 AD, as reported by Origen (185-254 AD), mentioned that Jesus made certain predictions which had been fulfilled.





ANCIENT CHRISTIAN SOURCES
(extra-biblical)



Clement, elder of Rome, letter to the Corinthian church (95 AD):

"The Apostles received the Gospel for us from the Lord Jesus Christ; Jesus Christ was sent forth from God. So then Christ is from God, and the Apostles are from Christ. Both therefore came of the will of God in the appointed order. Having therefore received a charge, and having been fully assured through the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ and confirmed in the word of God with full assurance of the Holy Ghost, they went forth with the glad tidings that the kingdom of God should come. So preaching everywhere in country and town, they appointed their firstfruits, when they had proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons unto them that should believe."





Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, letter to the Trallians (110-115 AD):

"Jesus Christ who was of the race of David, who was the Son of Mary, who was truly born and ate and drank, was truly persecuted under Pontius Pilate, was truly crucified and died in the sight of those in heaven and on earth and those under the earth; who moreover was truly raised from the dead, His Father having raised Him, who in the like fashion will so raise us also who believe on Him."





Ignatius, letter to the Smyrneans (110-115 AD):

"He is truly of the race of David according to the flesh, but Son of God by the Divine will and power, truly born of a virgin and baptised by John that all righteousness might be fulfilled by Him, truly nailed up in the flesh for our sakes under Pontius Pilate and Herod the tetrarch (of which fruit are we--that is, of his most blessed passion); that He might set up an ensign unto all ages through His resurrection."

"For I know and believe that He was in the flesh even after the resurrection; and when He came to Peter and his company, He said to them, `Lay hold and handle me, and see that I am not a demon without body.' And straightway they touched him, and they believed, being joined unto His flesh and His blood. Wherefore also they despised death, nay they were found superior to death. And after His resurrection He ate with them and drank with them."





Ignatius, letter to the Magnesians (110-115 AD):

"Be ye fully persuaded concerning the birth and the passion and the resurrection, which took place in the time of the governorship of Pontius Pilate; for these things were truly and certainly done by Jesus Christ our hope."





Quadratus, to Emperor Hadrian about 125 AD:

"The deeds of our Saviour were always before you, for they were true miracles; those that were healed, those that were raised from the dead, who were seen, not only when healed and when raised, but were always present. They remained living a long time, not only whilst our Lord was on earth, but likewise when He had left the earth. So that some of them have also lived to our own times."





(Pseudo-)Barnabas, written 130-138 AD:

"He must needs be manifested in the flesh. . . . He preached teaching Israel and performing so many wonders and miracles, and He loved them exceedingly. . . . He chose His own apostles who were to proclaim His Gospel. . . . But He Himself desired so to suffer; for it was necessary for Him to suffer on a tree."





Justin Martyr, to Emperor Antoninus Pius about 150 AD:

After referring to Jesus's birth of a virgin in the town of Bethlehem, and that His physical line of descent came through the tribe of Judah and the family of Jesse, Justin wrote, "Now there is a village in the land of the Jews, thirty-five stadia from Jerusalem, in which Jesus Christ was born, as you can ascertain also from the registers of the taxing made under Cyrenius, your first procurator in Judea."

"Accordingly, after He was crucified, even all His acquaintances forsook Him, having denied Him; and afterwards, when He had risen from the dead and appeared to them, and had taught them to read the prophecies in which all these things were foretold as coming to pass, and when they had seen Him ascending into heaven, and had believed, and had received power sent thence by Him upon them, and went to every race of men, they taught these things, and were called apostles."





Justin Martyr, in Dialogue with Trypho, around 150 AD:

"For at the time of His birth, Magi who came from Arabia worshipped Him, coming first to Herod, who then was sovereign in your land."

"For when they crucified Him, driving in the nails, they pierced His hands and feet; and those who crucified Him parted His garments among themselves, each casting lots for what he chose to have, and receiving according to the decision of the lot."

"Christ said amongst you that He would give the sign of Jonah, exhorting you to repent of your wicked deeds at least after He rose again from the dead . . . yet you not only have not repented, after you learned that He rose from the dead, but, as I said before, you have sent chosen and ordained men throughout all the world to proclaim that `a godless and lawless heresy had sprung from one Jesus, a Galilean deceiver, whom we crucified, but His disciples stole Him by night from the tomb, where He was laid when unfastened from the cross, and now deceive men by asserting that He has risen from the dead and ascended to heaven.'"

"For indeed the Lord remained upon the tree almost until evening, and they buried Him at eventide; then on the third day He rose again."

http://www.carlislecofc.org/extrabiblical.htm

 

[mrwitch]

I have already touched on the passage of Josephus in my very first post to this thread. Don't you find it interesting, that this passage was not discovered until 342 CE? And that he refers to Jesus as... Jesus, rather than Christus, or Yashu? As in the other texts you've presented.

It would seem that peopel like Julius Caesar were always refered to as... Julius Caesar. Same can be said for Nero, Plato, Socrates, etc.

This is the problem I and others have with these texts.

Another thing I do not understand in the persistence of the existence of Christ: So what? You still have to present evidence to him being a spiritual being, or a son of god, or living god.

Proving the former (the existence), does not automatically mean that the latter (son of god, or living god), falls into place.

Sorry. I'm not impressed. With all due respect.

 

[CCGR]

The title of this thread is Did the Biblical Jesus exist?  Not "Is there a God?"  I was only addressing this one issue.  I know you don't care about Josephus but I just pasted the contents of the site.  so there is extra information oh well.  I'm not a historian so I don't know what formalities/titles are normal or not.  not here to impress only answer to the best of my abilities.

I will admit that there is nuch much historical proof of Jesus' walk on earth, most is recorded in the Bible which proves it's historical accuracy on numerous accounts.

I you consider the Bible accurate Jesus fufilled many prophesies and rose from the dead (and has wittnesses!).  Many other religious figures are still dead.  Jesus was more than a man or a good teacher to rise from the dead.  The other historical accounts affirm that he came, died and rose.

 

[mrwitch]

Out of all the biblical stories, I believe there are only 2 passages which jive with historical accounts. Which only proves that they did not write the bible in a vacuum.

Most of the biblical stories were taken from earlier religions, and made to conform to monotheist thought. Such as the story of Noah and the flood: Which has a direct link to the story of Glidemesh, which is a much older text, than that of Noah.

I don't know how you can state that the bible is historically accurate with all it's inconsistancies, or the fact that it only chornicles about 5,000 years of human "history."

I'm sorry, with all due respect. But the bible at best is a secondary source, based on hand me down stories, not written down until hundreds of years after the fact.

I do not know how you can testify to it being accurate? Even to claim the existence of Jesus? And as I stated before, which you have yet to address, and I shall restate:

I do not understand in the persistence of the existence of Christ: So what? You still have to present evidence to him being a spiritual being, or a son of god, or living god.

Or does your religion stand viable, with just his teachings and the possiblity he existed, and all that magic and son of god thing doesn't matter?

 

[CCGR]

Quote[/b] ]I don't know how you can state that the bible is historically accurate with all it's inconsistancies, or the fact that it only chornicles about 5,000 years of human "history."

What I mean by historical accuracy is through archeological findings they find ruins of town, rulers, and other people mentioned in the Bible. It affirms what it teaches. What innaccuracies are you referring to?

Quote[/b] ]I'm sorry, with all due respect. But the bible at best is a secondary source, based on hand me down stories, not written down until hundreds of years after the fact.

It isn't a science book but it did state that the world was round, the importance of blood and other tidbits before man found out for certain. But the history and lineage is noteworthy too.

Much of the new testament was written and spread within 30 years of Christ's death/resurrection. Surely if there were errors they would have been refuted. (if only the internet was around back then...)

Quote[/b] ]I do not know how you can testify to it being accurate? Even to claim the existence of Jesus? And as I stated before, which you have yet to address, and I shall restate:

I do not understand in the persistence of the existence of Christ: So what? You still have to present evidence to him being a spiritual being, or a son of god, or living god.

Well he was more than human to rise from the dead. He performed miracles and healed the sick. He was not your average joe. He Of course you don't see the significance of Christ, he's the basis of our faith, our religion. To you a guy that may never have existed.

What makes Christ God? well he said so, he performed miracles, controled weather, rose from the dead, raised others from dead. He was sinless and can not lie.

records we have to those miracles are the texts I showed you and the bible, but if you don't accept those for anything I apologize I can't exactly arrange for a meeting with him

Quote[/b] ]Or does your religion stand viable, with just his teachings and the possiblity he existed, and all that magic and son of god thing doesn't matter?

Here's the thing, most of us here are Bible believing Christians. We consider the Bible written by man and inspired by God. Nothing is there that the shouldn't be and whatever goes against it's teaching we don't even consider.

It's silly trying to prove religion with science. But I can show you some things that are historical. The Bible has a good track record and there are some outside sources too. But there isn't a lot out there. The basis of our faith is to Believe that Jesus Christ is God's son, that he came down, died, rose and will come again. The key to religion is faith. I have never met Jesus, but I do have faith in him and believe he exists and walked this earth a little over 2000 years ago.

people have died for him, died for preserving the Bible, died spreading his message. if this was a sham I wouldn't die for it

 

[Ultima Avatar]

So I have a question dude: you will not all yourself to believe in anything you cannot immediately substantiate yourself with? Right now, at hand? Or could you stand to wait, oh, say, seventy years? Or maybe until you die? Could you stand for that long to find the end result of your beliefs verified?

Would Darwin have waited to have delivered to him on his doorstep on the Day of His Death that evolution was, in fact, the truth of it all?

I think so. And I think that we, as Christians, believing that we will live on after we die, will be most rewarded at the end with its verification. And if it's all false, as Paul said, most pitiful of all men are we. But hey, if it's false, according to liberal America relativist standards, I've lived "a good" life.

I can stand to wait in expectancy for my King, and to die in the expectancy. After all, I have something to live for. Something that will reach past the darkness of the closing door of life.

 

[mrwitch]

CCGR: Here's a couple of places which will show some inconsistencies in the bible:
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/

http://www.factology.com/paul/index.htm

And for every find, they find out there in the desert, it askes more questions than it answers. For instances the 2 cities which some claim to be sodom and gamorrah. First off, according to findings, these 2 cities are in the right place, however they never went by the name sodom and gamorrah. And according to research of these 2 cities, it would appear that the people living there, where not as wicked as the bible claimed to be. They had family values.

I will grant you one city did meet with some sort of destruction, however, that does not mean it was the doing of god. They could had been taken over by a neighbroing kingdom, it could had been their own doing.

And you're right, the bible is not a science book, much less a history book. Science has nothing to do with my skepticism.

It's not a matter of science. Look, you claim that christ has to be a spiritural being, because he rose from the dead. How do you know that? Did you see it for yourself? You're basing your beliefs on here-say. Yeah, the bible said so, but how can you prove it?

The fact of the matter is, you don't know, and neither do I.
what you have is a perception, of what you believe happened. It is as you say... Faith. And faith is not knowledge.

If you peel away the spiritual aspect of the bible, you would have a fairly decent aspect of how one can live his or her life. But, not the only one.

See, I can accept certain aspects of the bible, certain ethics and morality. Though not all. But I can do it without that spiritual aspect.

But for you there has to be that spiritual aspect to it. Otherwise it seems so... meaningless.

 

[mrwitch]

Ultima Avatar: I have a christian upbringing. I have never in my life seen a vision, or an angel, or the virgin mary. Never with a group, never by myself.

I find it facinating, how we are raised with a certain notion, of not taking things at face value. If you go into a court of law with a claim that your neighbor is a child molester, and you have no proof of it, other than what other people told you; no police record, or evidence to support your claim. All you have, is what you heard on the street, what do you think would happen?

Case Dismissed, and you'll likely be slapped with a slander suit. It has nothing to do with liberalism, or conservativism. Please, don't go that way.

It's so funny, how we question everything in this world, except for god. Why is that? Do you fear death? Guess what, so do I. Do find comfort, in the thought that you will live forever in some eternal paradise?

You know, maybe there is something out there. I don't know, and neither do you. And if there is something out there, what makes you think you're right, as oppose to say the... Buddhist? Or the Hindus, for that matter.

You never know. I'm just having a little discussion here. I know what I think. What I believe, and for the moment I'll keep that to myself.

 

[Big J]

Quote[/b] (CCGR @ Sep. 17 2003,6:59)]

Quote[/b] ]It isn't a science book but it did state that the world was round

Where?
It states implicitly that the world is kind of dome shaped, on pillars.

Quote[/b] ]the importance of blood

Importance how? that if you lose blood you die? Or are you speaking of something else?

Quote[/b] ]Much of the new testament was written and spread within 30 years of Christ's death/resurrection. Surely if there were errors they would have been refuted.

You mean like the Gnostic works? I mean, the NT wasn't compiled until much later.

Quote[/b] ]records we have to those miracles are the texts I showed you and the bible,

What miracles in other sources? Something written 100 years later is not a primary source.

Oh, and how do you rectify the Talmud quote with the gospel account?

Quote[/b] ]people have died for him, died for preserving the Bible, died spreading his message. if this was a sham I wouldn't die for it

So does that mean the Roman Catholics are right? They died for their beliefs...

Or how about Islam? Muslims die for Allah.

And I guess that means that communism is valid, since people died for their beliefs in the teachings of Marx.

 

[Ultima Avatar]

Ahh, mrwitch, you terribly misunderstood my part when I stated of America's liberalist relativism.
For instance, Americans nowadays, for some bizarre reason, hate to be called wrong. So America today is set up so that everyone is right.
I have been brung up according to Christianity.
Guess what dude? I ain't seen no angel yet. And since Mary isn't a virgin, I'd be surprised if I ever saw the Virgin Mary, and it would be appalling if I could tell she was a virgin, too. So I haven't seen Mary appear in the sky, either. And how the holy heaven would I be able to ID her, either? Sure I wouldn't confuse her with La Virgen de Guadalupe?
And I haven't seen God come down and chitchat with me over tea, either. So you and I aren't too different in the respect of visions.
Never in a group, never by myself. Possibly because I hate groups, and I doubt highly a group is more likely to see what cannot be seen than I can alone...and possibly because groups distort what each individual witnesses.

I originally took God at face value. Then I began to study Him for myself, and guess what I found? He stands firm against it all.

I can take stock in dying a happy death. Maybe I'll kiss the curb, or maybe I'll be roasted alive in a burning house, or maybe I'll drown in a neighbor's swimming pool, or maybe a rabid dog will chomp down on my leg. I'll die one way or another. That tends to be this big human factor: death comes to us all.

I am not afraid to die. Because? Because it leads me to another life, the final life, the true life. To quote CS Lewis' Till We Have Faces: "Nothing is yet in its true form."

Your example, however, would stand but for this: God is not fleshly. He is beyond it. So of course, in no court of law, would he be able to stand up, because people wouldn't seek to prove His existence: they would seek to disprove Him by offering no physical evidence for His being, nevermind that to have knowledge is to destroy faith.

 

[CCGR]

Science vs. the Bible

There are passages in the Bible that coincide with scientific principles that weren't widely accepted until hundreds of years after the Bible had been written. Here are some examples:

1. The Bible said the earth is round and is suspended in space:

In various verses, the Bible says the earth is round and that it is suspended in space:

"He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth..." (Isaiah 40:22, NIV). (By the way, the Hebrew language at that time did not have a word for "sphere," only for "circle.")

"He spreads out the northern [skies] over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing" (Job 26:7, NIV).

2. The Bible described the Hydrologic Cycle:

In various passages, the Bible describes a hydrologic cycle, the process by which clouds are formed, rain is produced and ground water is replenished. Science made the same discovery in the 1600s, long after the Bible passages were written. Here are the related Bible verses:

"He wraps up the waters in his clouds, yet the clouds do not burst under their weight" (Job 26:8, NIV).

"He draws up the drops of water, which distill as rain to the streams; the clouds pour down their moisture and abundant showers fall on mankind" (Job 36:27-28, NIV).

"The wind blows to the south and turns to the north; round and round it goes, ever returning on its course. All streams flow into the sea, yet the sea is never full. To the place the streams come from, there they return again" (Ecclesiastes 1:6-7, NIV).

3. The Bible stated that the stars cannot be counted:

For centuries, scientists and astronomers thought they could count the precise number of stars in the universe. Brahe, for example, said there were 777. Kepler claimed the total was 1,005. Hipparchus said there were 1,022 stars. Ptolemy raised the number to 1,056. Eventually, scientists, including the great Galileo, concluded that the stars could not be numbered, just as the Bible had always claimed:

"I will make the descendants of David my servant and the Levites who minister before me as countless as the stars of the sky and as measureless as the sand on the seashore" (Jeremiah 33:22, NIV).

He took him outside and said, "Look up at the heavens and count the stars--if indeed you can count them." Then he said to him, "So shall your offspring be." (Genesis 15:5, NIV).

4. The Bible stated the existence of valleys and springs in the seas:

Only until the past few hundred years did people have the technology to discover that there are deep valleys and fresh water springs in the oceans. But the Bible always knew:

"The valleys of the sea were exposed and the foundations of the earth laid bare at the rebuke of the Lord. . . " (2 Samuel 22:16, NIV).

"In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, on the seventeenth day of the second month--on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. " (Genesis 7:11, NIV).

5. The Bible stated that kind words and laughter are good for one's health:

In recent years, American newspapers have published various reports that laughter releases chemicals within a person's body that can contribute to one's health. And, that depression and stress can weaken the immune system and contribute to various health problems. But, the Bible knew of the health virtues of laughter roughly 3,000 years ago when the Bible's book of Proverbs was recorded:

"Pleasant words are a honeycomb, sweet to the soul and healing to the bones." (Proverbs 16:24, NIV).

"A cheerful heart is good medicine, but a crushed spirit dries up the bones." (Proverbs 17:22, NIV).

6. The Bible stated that stars differ from one another centuries before scientists reached the same conclusion:

Today we know that the stars in the skies are very different from one another, that they are made up of differing concentrations of different elements, and that they vary in their sizes, their ages and in their proximity to the earth. But the ancient people had no way to prove this. Even so, Paul, who received many insights from Jesus, wrote a passage about 2000 years ago in the Bible's book of 1 Corinthians that said that the stars in the heavens did indeed differ from one another:

"The sun has one kind of splendor, the moon another and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendor." (1 Corinthians 15:41).

http://www.therefinersfire.org/science_bible.htm

Statements Consistent With Biology
The book of Leviticus (written prior to 1400 BC) describes the value of blood.


Leviticus 17:11
‘For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul.’

The blood carries water and nourishment to every cell, maintains the body’s temperature, and removes the waste material of the body’s cells. The blood also carries oxygen from the lungs throughout the body. In 1616, William Harvey discovered that blood circulation is the key factor in physical life—confirming what the Bible revealed 3,000 years earlier.[1]

http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml

back in the eaarly days of medicine they would "bleed" people to try and rid them of their illness. This in turn would be weakening them instead. Kind of silly, glad we finally learned.

 

[mrwitch]

Ultima Avatar: How can you study something you can't see? You say you've never seen god, not by yourself or with a group. You say god is not fleshy, that he's beyond that. How do you know that? What are you talking about?

You've studied the invisible. I would like to know how you did that?

And you say you're not afraid of death, because you know in your mind, you're going to live forever, in some enternal paradise. You sure you're not using that, because you really fear death?

You just don't want to admit it... ?

 

[mrwitch]

CCGR: One minute you tell me the bible isn't a science book, the next minute you're giving out all these scientific theories, which can be found in the bible.

So you say the bible says the world is round. Then why, for centuries did christianity insist the world is flat? And threaten Galeleo with death, if he didn't recant his theory that the world is round?

The bible is neither a science or history book. It is a guide book. For how one can live his or her life. But it's not the only way, and it's not the only guide book around.