Secular Evidence Of The Existence Of Jesus

[sandiego4me]

I am answering Slave2six’s challenge to prove that Jesus existed.  (By the way, six, that’s a cool moniker). 

 

Before we get started, I will save Brother Jeff a lot of time.  It is duly noted that you will call me a dumb-a_ _, a F - - - ing  fill-in-the-blank, and every other conceivable pejorative.  Your objections are duly noted. Ravenstar, “you’re a complete idiot” comments are also duly noted (Folks: this is said tongue-in-cheek as a joke).  Having said that, let me present the evidence that Jesus existed (NOTE: Listed below is a summary, trying to keep it short.  If anybody wants my full, in-depth analysis, sent me a message and I’ll send it to you):

 

 

1. The Numbers.   Throughout history, there have literally been billions of people who have identified themselves as Christians.   This traces all the way back to the first century.  Mind you, Christianity grew out of a Jewish nation.  The Jews were ardent followers of the Torah and the law.  Extremely faithful to Judaism.  Something odd had to happen to cause thousands upon thousands of Jews to abandon Judaism and move to Christianity.  Moreover, this happened in the capital of Judaism, Jerusalem.  This would be akin to folks in Mecca leaving Islam and taking up another religion. 

 

2. Writings About Jesus.  Writings about Jesus came into existence within 50 years of his existence and continue down to today.   Now, most folks will dismiss the Bible as unreliable since Christians had a vested interest in Jesus.  However, we would not suggest that the Jews’ account of the Holocaust is unreliable, since it happened to them.  The fact of the matter is that folks who have the greatest interest in something take the most effort to preserve a memory of it.   This does not make it unreliable.  

 

3. Non-Christian References to Jesus.  Here are just a few secular historians that referenced Jesus:

 

a. Tacitus (AD 55-120) was a Roman historian.  He has been called “the greatest historian” of ancient Rome  Tacitus made several references to Christians and Christ. 

 

b. Josephus. Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (AD 37-97).  He was the court historian for emperor Vespasian.  In his work, The Antinquities, Josephus made two references to Jesus.

 

c. Suetonius.  Gaius Suetonius Tranquillas was the chief secretary of Emperor Hadrian (AD 117-138).  He had access to official records.  He, too, made references to Christians and Christ. 

 

d. Pliny the Younger.  A Roman author and administrator under governor Bithynia.  A book written by Pliny in 112 AD speaks about Christianity in the providence of Bithynia, and provides many facts about Jesus. 

e. Emperor Trajan.  Pliny the Younger’s inquiry received a reply from Emperor Trajan.  Trajan specifically referenced Christians and how to treat them. 

 

f. Emperor Hadrian.  The existence of trials for Christians is confirmed when Emperor Hadrian responded to an inquiry re: such.  Emperor Hadrian’s letter specifically talked about Christians.

 

g. Thallus.   In AD 221, Julius Africanus made reference to Thallus’s (AD 52) History.   The issue of darkness over the land during the time of the crucifixion is disputed. 

 

h. Lucian.  A second century Greek satirist, spoke derisively of Jesus and early Christians. 

 

i. Mara Bar-Serapion.   Written between the first and third centuries, in a letter to his son, asks his son to emulate wise teachers of the past.  In the letter, he criticizes the Jews for rejecting their king, a clear reference to Christ.  

 

h. Other non-Christian documents (between 70 - 150 AD) referred to Christ (e.g. Teledoth Jesu, The Talmud, the Gnostic Gospels, etc.). 

 

This isn’t close to all of the evidence.  Simply put, there is a considerable “secular” evidence that clearly supports that Christ existed.  

[TheRedneckProfessor]

Okay, to save you all the trouble of reading the tripe listed above, allow me to summarize the "arguments."

 

1. A lot of people believe in jesus.

 

2. Some people wrote about jesus.

 

3. A few of these writers weren't christians.

 

Now allow me to offer a rebuttal.

 

1. A lot of people enjoy Spiderman

 

2. Stan Lee wrote about Spiderman

 

3. Stan Lee is not exactly the image of a stand-up christian.

[mymistake]

The Easter Bunny is real because millions of children believe in the Easter Bunny.

 

Batman is real because there are many comic books written about Batman.

 

King Author was real because people wrote about him long after his time was past.

 

Jesus Christ is a myth that never existed in the flesh.  Paul invented Christ based on an earlier Jewish rabbi who had lived hundreds of years before Paul was born.  Religious sects that were competing against Paul's scam wrote the gospels so that they could get in on the action.  If you write your own gospel you can make Jesus support your religious views.  The passage from Flavius Josephus is a forgery.  In the fourth century Rome needed something that would hold their empire together so they took over and modified Christianity.  Then they forced it on everyone.  Anybody who didn't like it was burned as a heretic with all their writings destroyed and their message wiped out of history.  Rome did such a good job of spreading this Roman religion that Christianity out lived the empire and remains strong to this day.

 

Of course if the original Christians could see modern Christians they would consider them heretics and vice versa.  Paul's followers didn't even believe Jesus was God.

[mymistake]

If Christ died around 33 AD (strange that Christians have no idea when such an important event happened - they don't know the day, month or year) then any historian who wrote about Jesus after the 30's was not an eye witness.  It's quite simple.

 

There were many historians who were alive and keeping historical records in Palestine in the 30's AD.  None of them mention Jesus Christ.  Not one.  So either these guys saw the crowds following Jesus, watched Jesus heal people, watched Jesus create food out of thin air, watched Jesus raise people from the dead, witnessed the great earthquake and strange events in the sky when Jesus died and also saw hundreds of tombs open and zombies come pouring out when Jesus rose again and decided that none of that was important enough to write down . . .  or the story is religious propaganda.

[MerryG]

 

2. Writings About Jesus.  Writings about Jesus came into existence within 50 years of his existence and continue down to today. 

 

Ditto to what others have said. But this one gave me the biggest laugh.

 

You're kidding, right? So if I start making up stories about something 50 freaking years after it supposedly happened and I live in an era where nobody has any means of checking the facts and I come up with a story that's really persuasive (maybe because it supports what people want to believe for some reason), so others like it and start writing about it, too, and apply their own agendas to it, changing any detail they wish ...

 

... that makes the story I invented true?

 

Man. That's about the lowest standard of "truth" I can think of.

 

Nothing you mentioned constitutes "evidence" -- and why isn't this proselytizing topic in the Lion's Den?

[TheRedneckProfessor]

Honestly, sandiego, do you really think you are the first one to bring this "evidence" to our attention?

[sdelsolray]

 

I am answering Slave2six’s challenge to prove that Jesus existed.  (By the way, six, that’s a cool moniker). 

 

Before we get started, I will save Brother Jeff a lot of time.  It is duly noted that you will call me a dumb-a_ _, a F - - - ing  fill-in-the-blank, and every other conceivable pejorative.  Your objections are duly noted. Ravenstar, “you’re a complete idiot” comments are also duly noted (Folks: this is said tongue-in-cheek as a joke).  Having said that, let me present the evidence that Jesus existed (NOTE: Listed below is a summary, trying to keep it short.  If anybody wants my full, in-depth analysis, sent me a message and I’ll send it to you):

 

 

1. The Numbers.   Throughout history, there have literally been billions of people who have identified themselves as Christians.   This traces all the way back to the first century.  Mind you, Christianity grew out of a Jewish nation.  The Jews were ardent followers of the Torah and the law.  Extremely faithful to Judaism.  Something odd had to happen to cause thousands upon thousands of Jews to abandon Judaism and move to Christianity.  Moreover, this happened in the capital of Judaism, Jerusalem.  This would be akin to folks in Mecca leaving Islam and taking up another religion. 

 

 

… 

 

The Argument from Popularity is a logical fallacy.  But you knew that already, didn't you?  

 

Something "odd had to happen"?  Perhaps the threat of death for nonconformance was a factor.  Indeed, a large factor.  But you knew that already, didn't you?

 

Judaism was not simply one religion at that time.  It was a complicated set of many sects.  But you knew that already, didn't you?

 

 

 

…

 

2. Writings About Jesus.  Writings about Jesus came into existence within 50 years of his existence and continue down to today.   Now, most folks will dismiss the Bible as unreliable since Christians had a vested interest in Jesus.  However, we would not suggest that the Jews’ account of the Holocaust is unreliable, since it happened to them.  The fact of the matter is that folks who have the greatest interest in something take the most effort to preserve a memory of it.   This does not make it unreliable.

…

 

Most rational thinkers who have studied the facts reject the accuracy of the Bible because of many reasons.  Many reasons.  Forgeries, mistranslations, politically based additions and subtractions, pure fiction in the first instance, etc.  Your premise is incomplete.  But you knew this already, didn't you?

 

Comparing the writings from thousands of years ago (many of which were based on oral tradition) and many of which were not meant to be accurate accounts of history or reality in the first place to written history of the Holocast is disingenuous.  Apples and oranges.   More specifically, there is actual empirical evidence of the Holocast.  There is not empirical evidence of most of your sky fairy mythology.  But you knew this already, didn't you?

 

 

…

 

3. Non-Christian References to Jesus.  Here are just a few secular historians that referenced Jesus:

 

a. Tacitus (AD 55-120) was a Roman historian.  He has been called “the greatest historian” of ancient Rome  Tacitus made several references to Christians and Christ. 

 

b. Josephus. Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (AD 37-97).  He was the court historian for emperor Vespasian.  In his work, The Antinquities, Josephus made two references to Jesus.

 

c. Suetonius.  Gaius Suetonius Tranquillas was the chief secretary of Emperor Hadrian (AD 117-138).  He had access to official records.  He, too, made references to Christians and Christ. 

 

d. Pliny the Younger.  A Roman author and administrator under governor Bithynia.  A book written by Pliny in 112 AD speaks about Christianity in the providence of Bithynia, and provides many facts about Jesus. 

e. Emperor Trajan.  Pliny the Younger’s inquiry received a reply from Emperor Trajan.  Trajan specifically referenced Christians and how to treat them. 

 

f. Emperor Hadrian.  The existence of trials for Christians is confirmed when Emperor Hadrian responded to an inquiry re: such.  Emperor Hadrian’s letter specifically talked about Christians.

 

g. Thallus.   In AD 221, Julius Africanus made reference to Thallus’s (AD 52) History.   The issue of darkness over the land during the time of the crucifixion is disputed. 

 

h. Lucian.  A second century Greek satirist, spoke derisively of Jesus and early Christians. 

 

i. Mara Bar-Serapion.   Written between the first and third centuries, in a letter to his son, asks his son to emulate wise teachers of the past.  In the letter, he criticizes the Jews for rejecting their king, a clear reference to Christ.  

 

h. Other non-Christian documents (between 70 - 150 AD) referred to Christ (e.g. Teledoth Jesu, The Talmud, the Gnostic Gospels, etc.). 

 

…

 

Ah yes…the cut and paste.   All of these "sources", at best, are third hand accounts decades or centuries after the alleged events.  Moreover, they were merely reporting the claim(s), not verifying that the original claim(s) occurred.  Repeating a lie, or a tale, or a fabrication, or an exaggeration, or a myth, or a legend does not make any of them true.  None of these sources provide independent empirical evidence.  None.  But you knew this already, didn't you?

 

But then again, perhaps you did  not know any of this.  You only have religious faith (i.e., mere belief without empirical evidence) in your religious dogma.  Well, many people do too.

 

Religious faith is for intellectual and emotional cowards.  It makes you lazy.  Very lazy…and narcissistic, and holier-than-thou, and xenophobic, and …

 

 

sandiego4me, on 14 Nov 2013 - 5:09 PM, said:

 

…

 

This isn’t close to all of the evidence.  Simply put, there is a considerable “secular” evidence that clearly supports that Christ existed.  

 

But (apparently) it is the best "evidence" you have.  You do not seem to understand what constitutes evidence, particularly relevant empirical evidence.  Your logical fallacy noted above doesn't.  Neither does your non-sequitur trying to equate the Holocast reporting with the writing of fairy tales for political and religious purposes. 

 

I do not believe or give credence to nearly anything you write.  You merely parrot already discounted religious dogma and discredited Christian Apologetics.  And, you're not very good at it.  Not good at all.  Show us this additional "evidence" you claim exists.  

 

[florduh]

sandiego4me, there's something you should keep in mind.

 

Assuming you're sincere, it will look as if we are of closed minds and will say anything to refute your religion. Please remember that most of us were once where you are in your thinking. We have been pastors, missionaries, teachers and serious students of the Bible. We know the material; we know the apologetic techniques and have used them ourselves. We have been where you are, you have not been where we are. We got to this place not through some mindless rebellion but rather through thoughtful and painful study and reflection. 

 

Perhaps some study and reflection is in order for everyone.

[florduh]

We are now in the Lion's Den.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

Thanks, Florduh.  This is where this thread should have been posted in the first place.

[HymenaeusAlexander]

Before we get started...

 

Before you get started, you need set the parameters for what you mean by "Jesus existed" or we won't know what you are trying to prove. We need to establish the goal posts here.

 

Are you trying to prove the minimalist hypothesis? This would entail proving merely that there was a flesh and blood Jewish man named Yeshua who lived in Palestine as an adult some time in the 20's CE, who was known as a teacher and was crucified in Jerusalem by the Roman government when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea. Is that the goal?

 

Or are you trying to prove that the Jesus as described in the canonical New Testament books who rose from the dead and healed the sick and turned water into wine existed? That is a completely different task. I ask because those are two different claims. One of those claims is far more ordinary than the other and the evidential burden much, much lighter.

 

Frankly, given your opening salvo, I don't think you're up to the task of either one as you appear to be merely regurgitating the usual irrelevant information you found on some apologetics website or in a Josh McDowell book.

 

1. The Numbers.   Throughout history, there have literally been billions of people who have identified themselves as Christians.   This traces all the way back to the first century.  Mind you, Christianity grew out of a Jewish nation.  The Jews were ardent followers of the Torah and the law.  Extremely faithful to Judaism.  Something odd had to happen to cause thousands upon thousands of Jews to abandon Judaism and move to Christianity.  Moreover, this happened in the capital of Judaism, Jerusalem.  This would be akin to folks in Mecca leaving Islam and taking up another religion.

 

OK, already we've got a problem here. You start off with an argumentum ad populum. That's not the biggest problem with your first point, though. The biggest problem is that you take for granted that "thousands upon thousands of Jews" abandoned Judaism and moved to Christianity. This has not been demonstrated. You can't introduce as evidence something that has not yet been proven. Oddly enough, the claim actually works against the argument for the Jesus portrayed in the Gospels, because it creates an expectation for evidence that such a thing happened. The problem is that people like Philo and Josephus make no mention of such mass conversions of Jews in Jerusalem and certainly not upwards of one tenth of the population, something which Roman authorities would have most certainly taken note of and recorded. Only the writer of Luke/Acts does. Curious.

 

2. Writings About Jesus.  Writings about Jesus came into existence within 50 years of his existence and continue down to today.   Now, most folks will dismiss the Bible as unreliable since Christians had a vested interest in Jesus.  However, we would not suggest that the Jews’ account of the Holocaust is unreliable, since it happened to them.  The fact of the matter is that folks who have the greatest interest in something take the most effort to preserve a memory of it.   This does not make it unreliable.  

 

The Holocaust survivors do not make extraordinary claims about people rising from the dead and such. The extraordinary claims and mythic motifs are what make so many of the early writings about Jesus appear unreliable, not the fact that they were written by interested parties. Welcome to historiography.

 

3. Non-Christian References to Jesus.  Here are just a few secular historians that referenced Jesus:

 

a. Tacitus (AD 55-120) was a Roman historian.  He has been called “the greatest historian” of ancient Rome  Tacitus made several references to Christians and Christ. 

 

b. Josephus. Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (AD 37-97).  He was the court historian for emperor Vespasian.  In his work, The Antinquities, Josephus made two references to Jesus.

 

c. Suetonius.  Gaius Suetonius Tranquillas was the chief secretary of Emperor Hadrian (AD 117-138).  He had access to official records.  He, too, made references to Christians and Christ. 

 

d. Pliny the Younger.  A Roman author and administrator under governor Bithynia.  A book written by Pliny in 112 AD speaks about Christianity in the providence of Bithynia, and provides many facts about Jesus. 

e. Emperor Trajan.  Pliny the Younger’s inquiry received a reply from Emperor Trajan.  Trajan specifically referenced Christians and how to treat them. 

 

f. Emperor Hadrian.  The existence of trials for Christians is confirmed when Emperor Hadrian responded to an inquiry re: such.  Emperor Hadrian’s letter specifically talked about Christians.

 

g. Thallus.   In AD 221, Julius Africanus made reference to Thallus’s (AD 52) History.   The issue of darkness over the land during the time of the crucifixion is disputed. 

 

h. Lucian.  A second century Greek satirist, spoke derisively of Jesus and early Christians. 

 

i. Mara Bar-Serapion.   Written between the first and third centuries, in a letter to his son, asks his son to emulate wise teachers of the past.  In the letter, he criticizes the Jews for rejecting their king, a clear reference to Christ.  

 

h. Other non-Christian documents (between 70 - 150 AD) referred to Christ (e.g. Teledoth Jesu, The Talmud, the Gnostic Gospels, etc.). 

 

Have you read these sources and what they have to say about Jesus or did you just cut and paste this from some apologist? I ask because your use of them betrays a complete lack of familiarity with these sources. NONE OF THEM wrote about Jesus while he would have been alive. Many were relying on Christian sources. Some of them are writing well over 100 years after Jesus was supposed to have lived. At least a couple were writing about Christians and not Christ himself. One of them (Thallus) merely recorded an eclipse and made no known reference to Jesus. Claiming him as an extrabiblical source is incredibly disingenuous.

 

I am left to conclude that, thus far, you have not even presented evidence that satisfies the burden of proof for even the minimalist hypothesis, much less made a case for the existence of "Gospel Jesus." Please continue with the rest of this "considerable evidence" you claim to have. Don't hold back.

[milesaway]

The ancient Egyptians kept records of everything, even the parts of their history where they didn't come off looking like hot stuff. So why is there no mention of Moses leading the Israelites out of Egypt? A diaspora of that magnitude surely would have been noticed by someone in the area. Same with the flood. A flood that big would have left evidence that would still be around even today, and yet there's nothing.

 

None of the writers and scholars living in the general location, around the same time, and within a hundred years of Jesus' supposed lifetime mention him. Surely the things he did would have been worth writing about, especially if any of those writers were outsiders. Alas there's nothing of the sort.

 

Then again, you're dealing with what was (at the time) a fledgling cult that copied off of other religions that predated it by thousands of years.

[pawn]

Evidence that the Flying Spaghetti Monster exists...

 

1. Millions of people eat spaghetti. They unknowingly partake in holy communion by eating our Lord's fleshy pasta, and drinking his tasty marinara blood. Many millions participate in eating the flesh and blood of the one true creator of the universe.

 

2. Books have been written about the holy pasta lord, and he has a multitude of followers.

 

3. Something can't come from nothing, so obviously the FSM created it.

 

4. pirates exist, by FSM's holy plan.

 

5. The FSM is speaking to me right now, and his noodle appendages are stroking me into an ecstasy of rapture!

 

6. Historians have overlooked the great FSM, because he is so mysterious an awesome, that he only came into the consciousness of us mortal humans once we finally entered into the modern Information Age. FSM has been hiding in the shadows for thousands of years, laughing at all the other religions. But now, in the 21st century, he is finally unveiling himself to humanity.

 

7. FSM has by far, the largest balls of any god.

[Ravenstar]

http://jesusneverexisted.com/josephus-etal.html

[Blue elephant]

Really sandiego!

 

I'm surprised you didn't use the "people believed this so strongly that they were prepared to die for their beliefs" argument.

 

Hmm, but then again, maybe you were awake on September 11, 2001.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

1. TheRedneckProfessor has posted 292 times on ex-christian.  Of those 292 posts, TheRedneckProfessor has garnered a total of 270 reputation points.  This proves statistically that a lot of people believe in TheRedneckProfessor.

 

2. TheRedneckProfessor has been mentioned in the writings of BornAgainAtheist, Margie, Slave2Six, Vigile, WarriorPoet, MyMistake, Revenstar, and many others.

 

3. None of the aforementioned writers are christians.  This proves that TheRedneckProfessor is a pretty important individual.

 

It sounds pretty arrogant, doesn't it?  Almost as though I wanted to start a cult of personality.  But these are exactly the same arguments you use to prove that jesus is the christ; only the names are changed. 

 

Sandiego, it is very easy to set oneself up as one's own god.  You think you believe in christ and him crucified.  You think that what you are doing on this website is the will of your risen saviour.  You think that the resistance you have experienced is persecution for the sake of righteousness.

 

But you delude yourself.

 

Your jesus is nothing more than your own self image super-imposed onto a deity that has been explained to you in such a way as to seem reasonable.  The characteristics you imagine your christ as having, they are nothing more than the qualities about yourself for which you are most fond.  I know, you will say that there is no way you worship yourself because you worship jesus and him alone; but don't you think it's at least slightly possible that jesus is something completely different from what you think of him?  Don't you think it is at least slightly plausible that what you assume is jesus is actually just your own desire as to what jesus should be?  We all have visions of what our perfect ideal of ourselves ought to be; are you sure you are not just calling your ideal of yourself "The Christ"?

[♦ ficino ♦]

Sandiego, you told Christsstavrous that you've done a ton of research on the historical evidence for Jesus, but it's clear from what you say about some of these sources that you have not read all of them... I'm not sure that you've read any of them.

 

Before I say anything else, I'd invite you to register on the earlywritings forum and post threads like this one that you post here.  People on there are very steeped in these sources, and you'll get a lot of very direct and informed answers.  See link:  

 

http://earlywritings.com/forum/viewforum.php?f=3

 

As Hymenaeus points out, it's not clear which "Jesus" you're trying to prove as having existed:  Hymenaeus' Jesus 1 and Jesus 2, I'll call them.  I'm just going to say a little about HA's first possibility, Jesus 1, that there was a flesh and blood itinerant religious preacher/prophet of that name in 1st century Palestine who was crucified because he got into trouble with the authorities.

 

You run into a problem immediately.  We today are used to equating "Jesus" and "Christ", and we use Christ as an alternative, proper name for the guy Jesus of Nazareth.  As you know, "Christ" is from the Greek for "anointed one."  There were many people claiming to be messiahs or "Christs" as even the NT attests.  You need to prove that references in secular historians to "Christ" or "Christians" are references to the flesh and blood purported Jesus of Nazareth, HA's Jesus 1, and not to some other personage who made messianic claims.  It is not clear that the Jesus cult, as one of a number of messianic movements, had a first century origin.  It may have had, but second century sources that refer merely to Christ don't prove a first century origin of the Jesus cult.

 

Some of the sources you mention can be eliminated as direct evidence because they in all probability collapse into Christian testimony (this begs the question, which group of followers of a messianic figure, but I leave that aside).  

 

i.e. your

 

d. Pliny did not write a book that speaks about Christianity or provides many facts about Jesus 1 or Jesus 2.  He wrote a letter to Trajan in which he talks about "Christians."  Were they in the Jesus cult or some other messianic movement?  You can't project the situations portrayed in the Book of Acts into the early second century and assume that Pliny's Christians were in the Jesus cult, though they may have been in that cult and not some other one.  In any case, Pliny's evidence about Christianity (whatever that movement was) came from the Christians he interrogated, so it's not direct testimony to Jesus.

 

e. Ditto about Trajan

 

f. the letter of Hadrian is not in any surviving collection of his letters but presented in the later Historia Augusta, in a passage talking about the emperor Aurelian (3rd century) and his views of the instability of Egypt.  Hadrian is quoted as saying that the Egyptian Jews and "Christians" get their religion from the earlier cult of the god, Serapis.  Some people use this as evidence that Christianity came from "oriental" mystery religion.  Some say it shows that it was an invention of the Romans themselves:  e.g. here http://caesarsmessiah.com/blog/2011/11/hadrian-wrote-that-serapis-and-christ-were-the-same-god/

I don't think you can use this text to prove anything about Jesus 1 or Jesus 2.

 

c. remarks on f. cover c., since Suetonius was Hadrian's secretary.  The two are not independent of each other.

 

a. Tacitus was a friend of Pliny.  Not much reason to think that Tacitus' info about "Christians" is independent of Pliny.  Note that Tacitus talks about a "Chrestus."  Not at all clear that this is "Christus" let alone Jesus 1.  Chrestus was a fairly common slave name - could have been a slave or ex-slave who was a moralizing or messianic preacher type.

 

b. Finally, I can't believe that you present Josephus simply as a source about Jesus.  There is a HUGE bibliography on the "Testimonium Flavianum."  Its authenticity is not established;  it's extremely controversial because the passage doesn't fit into what Josephus says elsewhere or into the context where it appears.  The earliest witness to it is in the 4th cent. historian, Eusebius, and a strong case can be made that it was inserted by him or by someone in his circle.  This topic is too complicated to get into here.  We can have a separate thread on it if you like.  I'm guessing it's been dealt with on this forum before.  The reference to James brother of Jesus stands or falls by the TF.

 

There is much more to say on the problem of the historical Jesus.  It hasn't been established that Jesus 1 is not a myth.  There's an entire academic journal called "Journal for the Study of the Historical Jesus."  I've read stuff in it.  

 

You haven't mentioned:

a- silence of Philo, who one thinks would have mentioned Jesus

b- silence of Josephus in his other works, and also in the Antiquities the Jesus of the TF is not a leading figure.  This alone casts doubt on the inflated claims made about him in the TF - why if he was so important does Josephus only talk about him in the very passage that Eusebius quotes? (the James passage stands or falls by the TF)

c- Josephus' statement that the emperor Vespasian fulfilled prophecy about becoming ruler of the world, a prophecy that, he says, the Jews (not the Christians) wrongly applied to themselves (Jewish War 6.312-313).  Josephus thus attests messianic interests among Jews in the decades of the first century leading up to their revolt against Rome.

d- evidence that Acts was composed by somebody using Josephus' Antiquities, which puts it too late to be direct evidence

[Geezer]

I have nothing of substance to add to what has already been posted. I will note, however, for anyone who is interested in reading a scholar who has concluded the “evidence” will not support an earthly Jesus I will refer you to Dr. Robert M. Price.

 

Dr. Price holds two PHD’s in theology. He is a former Baptist fundamentalist preacher. He has written extensively about this subject. I suggest books such as The Incredible Shrinking Son of Man, Deconstructing Jesus, and Jesus is Dead among his many published works.

[miekko]

I see some of the point I've made in this post already got made - but I did open the editor several hours ago and have intermittently edited the post ever since. Some points I make have not been made elsewhere though. I have decided to mark such points with bold font. 

 

I am answering Slave2six’s challenge to prove that Jesus existed.  (By the way, six, that’s a cool moniker). 

 

Before we get started, I will save Brother Jeff a lot of time.  It is duly noted that you will call me a dumb-a_ _, a F - - - ing  fill-in-the-blank, and every other conceivable pejorative.  Your objections are duly noted. Ravenstar, “you’re a complete idiot” comments are also duly noted (Folks: this is said tongue-in-cheek as a joke).  Having said that, let me present the evidence that Jesus existed (NOTE: Listed below is a summary, trying to keep it short.  If anybody wants my full, in-depth analysis, sent me a message and I’ll send it to you):

 

 

1. The Numbers.   Throughout history, there have literally been billions of people who have identified themselves as Christians.   This traces all the way back to the first century.  Mind you, Christianity grew out of a Jewish nation.  The Jews were ardent followers of the Torah and the law.  Extremely faithful to Judaism.  Something odd had to happen to cause thousands upon thousands of Jews to abandon Judaism and move to Christianity.  Moreover, this happened in the capital of Judaism, Jerusalem.  This would be akin to folks in Mecca leaving Islam and taking up another religion. 

However, Christian history most explicitly leads us to believe that Jews weren't that eager to convert - in fact, many slightly older Christian sources attribute the destruction of the temple to the Jews' unwillingness to accept Jesus as their savior. You yourself allude to this later on in the very same post, viz., 

 

In the letter, he criticizes the Jews for rejecting their king, a clear reference to Christ.  

 

 

Thirdly, early judeochristianity (which we have reason to suspect was a very small movement) seems not to have diverged much from Judaism. Calling it a separate religion is probably begging the question. There was a greater amount of variation within Judaism in late antiquity than there's been ever since - and some scholars (notably Daniel Boyarin) seem to think there was no clear partitioning between the two communities until the third century. That is, to people within Judaism, Christianity wasn't weird enough to be a different religion quite yet at the time.

 

Some of the internal movements within Judaism may have had a tense relation to Christianity, but so did Christianity probably to movements within Judaism as well, and other movements within Judaism were at similar odds with each other (yet we see, e.g. Josephus having short stints with three very mutually hostile groups); in fact, it's quite possible Christianity was less out there to a mainstream Jew than e.g. some of the more mysterious parts of Philo's Judaism, or for that matter some of the more extreme separatism of the Qumran sect. It is clear from early Christian writings that early judeochristians did not "abandon Judaism and move to Christianity", but rather altered their Judaism slightly - kashrut, ritual circumcision, temple sacrifices, sabbath observance and other clearly Jewish practices continued in judeochristian movements for as long as distinct judeochristian movements existed. Early Christian liturgies preserve very Jewish traits as well.

 

 

2. Writings About Jesus.  Writings about Jesus came into existence within 50 years of his existence and continue down to today.   Now, most folks will dismiss the Bible as unreliable since Christians had a vested interest in Jesus.  However, we would not suggest that the Jews’ account of the Holocaust is unreliable, since it happened to them.  The fact of the matter is that folks who have the greatest interest in something take the most effort to preserve a memory of it.   This does not make it unreliable.  

Fair enough. In the case of the holocaust, we have a significantly greater amount of primary witnesses - among surviving Jewish, Romani, Homosexual, Communist and generally dissident captives, as well as captured resistance fighters from pretty much all the countries the nazis conquered and finally, the liberating allied forces. Naturally, an industrial-scale genocide with about ten million victims 70 years ago will leave more tangible evidence as well as witnesses than what the entire population of Judea in 30CE will have left us. How the 'continue down to today' is relevant I cannot grasp, as every source written after, say, 200CE obviously is secondary, tertiary, ... n:tiary. Any new sources written today is at the very least dozens upon dozens of steps away from being relevant as to establishing his historicity, so there is, in reality, no relevance to whether Jesus existed that there still are being written things about him - recently, several action movies have been made about Thor! 

 

 

3. Non-Christian References to Jesus.  Here are just a few secular historians that referenced Jesus:

 

Slight correction - these are *all* the early historians that are even somewhat relevant that refer to Jesus! Not just some of them.

 

a. Tacitus (AD 55-120) was a Roman historian.  He has been called “the greatest historian” of ancient Rome  Tacitus made several references to Christians and Christ. 

 

Romans did probably not keep archives over people killed in far off dependencies, and Tacitus getting Pontius Pilate's title wrong indicates he probably did not go and verify this claim, but just reported what he heard from Christians. 

 

 

b. Josephus. Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (AD 37-97).  He was the court historian for emperor Vespasian.  In his work, The Antinquities, Josephus made two references to Jesus.

 

At the very least one of which is known to likely be a later fabrication.

 

c. Suetonius.  Gaius Suetonius Tranquillas was the chief secretary of Emperor Hadrian (AD 117-138).  He had access to official records.  He, too, made references to Christians and Christ. 

 

Both of which are terribly uninformative! ""Since the Jews constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he expelled them from Rome."". The other reference he makes (note how "references" make it sound like a significant number), only mentions Christians rather offhandedly - "a new and mischievous superstition"! 

d. Pliny the Younger.  A Roman author and administrator under governor Bithynia.  A book written by Pliny in 112 AD speaks about Christianity in the providence of Bithynia, and provides many facts about Jesus. 

 

 

The only things Pliny says about Christ himself is found in this passage: " Those who denied that they were or had been Christians, when they invoked the gods in words dictated by me, offered prayer with incense and wine to your image, which I had ordered to be brought for this purpose together with statues of the gods, and moreover cursed Christ--none of which those who are really Christians, it is said, can be forced to do--these I thought should be discharged. Others named by the informer declared that they were Christians, but then denied it, asserting that they had been but had ceased to be, some three years before, others many years, some as much as twenty-five years. They all worshipped your image and the statues of the gods, and cursed Christ." and "They asserted, however, that the sum and substance of their fault or error had been that they were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and to bind themselves by oath, not to some crime, but not to commit fraud, theft, or adultery, not falsify their trust, nor to refuse to return a trust when called upon to do so. When this was over, it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of food--but ordinary and innocent food."

This says nothing about who or what this Christ is - except that at least Pliny doesn't perceive of him as a God - however, the Latin there doesn't, of course, have an indefinite article so it may just as well mean "sung a hymn to Christ as if to God", or somesuch. This tells us Pliny knew little about the content of their religious notions, and what he tells us is thus not particularly informative.

 

 

 

 

f. Emperor Hadrian.  The existence of trials for Christians is confirmed when Emperor Hadrian responded to an inquiry re: such.  Emperor Hadrian’s letter specifically talked about Christians.

 

Christians are quite a distinct thing from 'Jesus Christ'. Everyone knows Christians exist, and have existed for quite some time now. There has to be some historical evidence of someone getting in contact with them, and hey presto, such evidence is forthcoming. How lucky for you. Using this as evidence for Jesus is nothing but an attempt at confusing some issues.

 

 

 

g. Thallus.   In AD 221, Julius Africanus made reference to Thallus’s (AD 52) History.   The issue of darkness over the land during the time of the crucifixion is disputed. 

h. Other non-Christian documents (between 70 - 150 AD) referred to Christ (e.g. Teledoth Jesu, The Talmud, the Gnostic Gospels, etc.). 

 

This isn’t close to all of the evidence.  Simply put, there is a considerable “secular” evidence that clearly supports that Christ existed.  

 

There is no clear evidence what eclipse of the sun Thallus referred to. Using Thallus' works to establish the existence of Jesus or the passover darkness is misleading, as we don't actually have Thallus' works extant, nor does Julius Africanus quote a sufficient amount to actually know what Thallus spoke of. A closer investigation into whether Julius Africanus refrained from doing quote-mining or not would be necessary to establish whether his quotation is worth anything at all.

 

 

 

Toldoth Yeshu is early medieval, not "70-150 AD". (The fact that you don't even know how it's spelled suggest you didn't even check a source or your source hasn't actually read it.) The Talmud, likewise, was compiled from the second to the fifth century. The mishnah (finished at about 200CE) - which forms the 'backbone' of the Talmud does not contain any clear reference to Jesus, and the possible references are all obscure enough that seeing Jesus in them rather suggests pareidolia than any actual similarity. There is, alas, a cottage industry of dishonest Christian scholars writing things where they find veiled references to Jesus everywhere in rabbinic literature. Some of them even fabricate entire Jewish works - I actually went looking for a reference in one such book I read ten years ago only to have to conclude after painstaking research that the book referred to does not exist. 

 

The Gnostic gospels remain, though, but contain a lot of material I guess you would agree to label 'clearly fanciful and made up', no? This kind of shows that early writers in and close to Christianity were easily taken to write fanciful notions about their godman, which demonstrates the likelihood that the sources indeed are not quite credible on any great number of points. As a really neat illustration of this we can take the martyrdoms of St James and St Bartholomew, of which there are several different ones (or were they killed several times? None of them report any of them having been resurrected though!). Some people were so enamored with martyrdoms they made new ones up!

 

Even better, a church father made up entire African ethnicities with faces in their chests, without heads. 

 

Thus, your God demands of us that we rely on witnesses that have been proven unreliable. Such a God makes a demand you must be dumb to accept.

[Thurisaz]

1. The Numbers.   Throughout history, there have literally been billions of people who have identified themselves as Christians.

Over here, just 80 to 68 years ago, many millions of people claimed that the Jews are the source of all evil and the natural enemy of the Aryan Master Race™.

 

2. Writings About Jesus.  Writings about Jesus came into existence within 50 years of his existence and continue down to today.

Mein Kampf. The Protocols of the learned elders of Zion. Martin fucking Luther's "of the jews and their lies". And many more.

 

3. Non-Christian References to Jesus.  Here are just a few secular historians that referenced Jesus: [...]

 

"Newspapers" over here within the timeframe I mentioned above were full of "factual reports" of how the Jews really are depraved monstrous sub-humans.

 

Apply your own "reasoning" to that. What's the conclusion, hmmm?

 

By the way, yes a wandering preacher called Jesus and preaching some rather progressive and cool things may well have existed. But your cult isn't founded on the human preacher is it? To feel so extra super duper special you need him to have been the son of gaaaawd. Let's see whether you'll present some evidence for that claim in the rest of this thread (I haven't read it yet but I will now).

 

I do have a suspicion though that I won't find any. You'd be the first morontheist to offer evidence that hasn't been refuted a gazillion times.

[LifeCycle]

Nothing listed in the OP's post is evidence.

 

I'm still trying to figure out why someone would want the god of the bible to exist. That guy is a royal fuck up and an major asshole.

[florduh]

Thanks everyone for all the information. Whew! Now there's a butt load of facts and information to ignore!

[♦ ficino ♦]

I dredged up this old thread on Josephus and his supposed testimony to Jesus from Ex-Chr back in 2005:

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/191-josephus-and-testimonium-flavianum/

[MerryG]

Thanks everyone for all the information. Whew! Now there's a butt load of facts and information to ignore!

 

Yep. Hey, sandiego! How come you're not in here using your scholarly wisdom and solid facts to refute all these counterarguments?

[♦ ficino ♦]

IN #17 above I said a strong case can be made that Eusebius or someone in his circle interpolated the Testimonium Flavianum into Josephus' Antiquities.  I was thinking of this by Ken Olson, which just was published this year:

 

http://www.academia.edu/4062154/Olson_A_Eusebian_Reading_of_the_Testimonium_Flavianum_2013

 

I hope you can open the link.  If not, try googling Ken Olson and the title.

 

BTW the Center for Hellenic Studies is a mainstream academic research center run by Harvard.  It is not an atheist website or the like.