| Jul 25 @ 12:43 PM |
Did Jesus really exist?
|
|
yashaenka
Posts: 3,422
|
Amazingly, the question of an actual historical Jesus rarely confronts the religious believer. The power of faith has so forcefully driven the minds of most believers, and even apologetic scholars, that the question of reliable evidence gets obscured by tradition, religious subterfuge, and outrageous claims. The following gives a brief outlook about the claims of a historical Jesus and why the evidence the Christians present us cannot serve as justification for reliable evidence for a historical Jesus.
ALL CLAIMS OF JESUS DERIVE FROM HEARSAY ACCOUNTS
No one has the slightest physical evidence to support a historical Jesus; no artifacts, dwelling, works of carpentry, or self-written manuscripts. All claims about Jesus derive from writings of other people. There occurs no contemporary Roman record that shows Pontius Pilate executing a man named Jesus. Devastating to historians, there occurs not a single contemporary writing that mentions Jesus. All documents about Jesus got written well after the life of the alleged Jesus from either: unknown authors, people who had never met an earthly Jesus, or from fraudulent, mythical or allegorical writings. Although one can argue that many of these writings come from fraud or interpolations, I will use the information and dates to show that even if these sources did not come from interpolations, they could still not serve as reliable evidence for a historical Jesus, simply because all sources derive from hearsay accounts.
Hearsay means information derived from other people rather than on a witness' own knowledge.
Courts of law do not generally allow hearsay as testimony, and nor does honest modern scholarship. Hearsay provides no proof or good evidence, and therefore, we should dismiss it.
If you do not understand this, imagine yourself confronted with a charge for a crime which you know you did not commit. You feel confident that no one can prove guilt because you know that there exists no evidence whatsoever for the charge against you. Now imagine that you stand present in a court of law that allows hearsay as evidence. When the prosecution presents its case, everyone who takes the stand against you claims that you committed the crime, not as a witness themselves, but solely because other people said so. None of these other people, mind you, ever show up in court, nor can anyone find them.
Hearsay does not work as evidence because we have no way of knowing whether the person lies, or simply bases his or her information on wrongful belief or bias. We know from history about witchcraft trials and kangaroo courts that hearsay provides neither reliable nor fair statements of evidence. We know that mythology can arise out of no good information whatsoever. We live in a world where many people believe in demons, UFOs, ghosts, or monsters, and an innumerable number of fantasies believed as fact taken from nothing but belief and hearsay. It derives from these reasons why hearsay cannot serves as good evidence, and the same reasoning must go against the claims of a historical Jesus or any other historical person.
Authors of ancient history today, of course, can only write from indirect observation in a time far removed from their aim. But a valid historian's own writing gets cited with sources that trace to the subject themselves, or to eyewitnesses and artifacts. For example a historian today who writes about the life of George Washington, of course, can not serve as an eyewitness, but he can provide citations to documents which give personal or eyewitness accounts. None of the historians about Jesus give reliable sources to eyewitnesses, therefore all we have remains as hearsay.
|
|
  |
|
| Jul 25 @ 12:48 PM |
Did Jesus really exist? |
|
sail_dancer
Posts: 7,858
|
I don't think the existence or non-existenve of Jesus really matters. It is his philosophy that has withstood the weather of time.
I do however agree with you that there is no evidence that Jesus ever existed.
Peace
|
| |
|
| Jul 25 @ 12:59 PM |
Did Jesus really exist?
|
|
uab_5
Posts: 2,370
|
To say that that a rabbi named Jesus existed around 33 AD in Judea is as accurate as saying a engineer name Bill Smith worked for General Motors around 2000 AD.
Highly probable! 
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 25 @ 1:01 PM |
Did Jesus really exist? |
|
yashaenka
Posts: 3,422
|
What he is credited with saying by hearsay sounds like what the Buddha was created with in the same way!
|
| |
|
| Jul 25 @ 1:08 PM |
Did Jesus really exist?
|
|
uab_5
Posts: 2,370
|
I'm not sure what you're saying, y.
99% of history is lies.
Tell me....
Who is winning the Iraq War? Us or them?
The GOP is telling America that we are winning. The Dems are saying the insurgency is winning.
We can't even agree on events happening in our own time, so of course we can't verify that the Jesus or the Buddha said what from 2000+ years ago.
Heck, the only way I know sometimes that the CSA didn't win the War of Yankee Aggression is that Dixie isn't played before the Auburn-Alabama game. 
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 25 @ 1:21 PM |
Did Jesus really exist? |
|
hammertime
Posts: 13,021
|
The earliest gospel manuscripts don't have names on them. Names were added later. The Gospels are pseudepigraphic . Actual authors concealed their true identities behind the names of legendary characters. Pseudepigraphic writing was very popular with Jews during Hashmonean and Roman times and used by early Christians.
Letters of Paul are silent about the man Jesus. Paul never met Jesus. He doesn't mention a single deed or saying by Jesus other than the Last Supper. To Paul, Jesus was a disembodied figure, not a man of flesh and blood. And Paul had plenty of hallucinations too.
Philo of Alexandria wrote detail about early first century Palestine. Never named Jesus but names other self-proclaimed messiahs. 
Hey, how many VIRGIN BIRTHS????
Attis
Buddha
Dionysus
Hertha
Frigga
Hertha
Horus
Huitzilopochtli
Krishna
Mercury
Perseus
Romolus
Saoshyant
Jesus <----- Me too me too me too.....
NO CONTEMPORARY WRITERS WROTE ANYTHING ABOUT JESUS......
When it comes to Jesus, the historical Jesus, we come up empty. The time when Jesus is considered a very well documented period.
These historians lived during that time Jesus was said to have lived. There are staggering amounts of documents about Roman history. Historian Livy alone composed 142 volumes. Other historians who lived during that time are:
Aulus Perseus,
Columella,
Dio Chrysostom,
Justus of Tiberius,
Lucanus,
Lucius Florus,
Petronius,
Phaedrus,
Philo Judaeus,
Phlegon,
Pliny the Elder,
Plutarch,
Pomponius Mela,
Rufus Cartius,
Quintillian,
Quintus Curtius,
Seneca,
Silius Italicus,
Statius Caelicius,
Theon of Smyrna,
Valerius Flaccus, and
Valerius Maximus.
None of them mention anything about the life of Jesus. 
|
| |
|
| Jul 25 @ 1:29 PM |
Did Jesus really exist?
|
|
uab_5
Posts: 2,370
|
Just because he didn't make it into the historical record doesn't mean he he existed?
2000 years from now, I doubt anyone will have remembered me, but does that mean I failed to exist?
At the time of death, I don't doubt a rabbi known as Jesus was little more than another Jew that managed to piss off the Romans and earn himself an extremely painful death. 
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 25 @ 1:37 PM |
Did Jesus really exist? |
|
hammertime
Posts: 13,021
|
Uab
The guy was born to a celestial event where people traveled far following a star. He made clay pigeons come to life, killed a boy and brough him back to life. He was the smartest kid in the Temple. He raised the dead. Made the blind see. Feed the multitudes. Walked on water. Died and came back to life and not one single person wrote about this?????
Its likely that he didn't exist or he was just an ordinary guy who did ordinary things that later a myth was built around just like Elvis.
|
| |
|
| Jul 25 @ 1:40 PM |
Did Jesus really exist?
|
|
uab_5
Posts: 2,370
|
Its likely that he didn't exist or he was just an ordinary guy who did ordinary things that later a myth was built around just like Elvis.
Could've you picked a better example than Pelvis...say George Wsahington or Bobby Lee...or George Lucas?
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 25 @ 1:44 PM |
Did Jesus really exist? |
|
hammertime
Posts: 13,021
|
Well lots of people saw Elvis after he died and Jesus and Elvis have a lot in common. A lot....
Right after Elvis' death there were many sightings.
Right after Jesus' death there were also sightings.
Jesus has five letters in his name.
Elvis has five letters in his name.
Jesus' name ends with the letter "s".
Elvis' name ends with the letter "s".
Jesus said: "Love thy neighbor." (Matthew 22:39)
Elvis said: "Don't be cruel." (RCA, 1956)
Jesus is the Lord's shepherd.
Elvis dated Cybill Shepherd.
Jesus was part of the Trinity.
Elvis' first band was a trio.
Jesus walked on water. (Matthew 14:25)
Elvis surfed. (Blue Hawaii, Paramount, 1965)
Jesus' entourage, the Apostles, had 12 members.
Elvis' entourage, the Memphis Mafia, had 12 members.
Jesus was resurrected.
Elvis had the famous 1968 "comeback" TV special.
Jesus said, "If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink." (John 7:37)
Elvis said, "Drinks on me!" (Jailhouse Rock, MGM, 1957)
Jesus fasted for 40 days and nights.
Elvis had irregular eating habits. (e.g. 5 banana splits for breakfast)
Jesus is a Capricorn. (December 25)
Elvis is a Capricorn. (January 8)
Matthew was one of Jesus' many biographers. (The Gospel According to Matthew)
Neil Matthews was one of Elvis' many biographers. (Elvis: A Golden Tribute)
"Jesus countenance was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow." (Matthew 28:3)
Elvis wore snow-white jumpsuits with lightning bolts.
Jesus lived in state of grace in a Near Eastern land.
Elvis lived in Graceland in a nearly eastern state.
Mary, an important woman in Jesus' life, had an Immaculate Conception.
Priscilla, an important woman in Elvis' life, went to Immaculate Conception High School.
Jesus was first and foremost the Son of God.
Elvis first recorded with Sun Studios, which today are still considered to be his foremost recordings.
Jesus was the lamb of God.
Elvis had mutton chop sideburns.
Jesus' Father is everywhere.
Elvis' father was a drifter, and moved around quite a bit.
Jesus was a carpenter.
Elvis' favorite high school class was wood shop.
Jesus wore a crown of thorns.
Elvis wore Royal Crown hair styler.
Jesus H. Christ has 12 letters.
Elvis Presley has 12 letters.
No one knows what the "H" in "Jesus H. Christ" stood for.
No one was really sure if Elvis' middle name was "Aron" or "Aaron".
Jesus is often depicted in pictures with a halo that looks like a gold plate.
Elvis' face is often depicted on a plate with gold trim and sold through TV.
Jesus said: "Man shall not live by bread alone."
Elvis liked his sandwiches with peanut butter and bananas.
|
| |
|
| Jul 25 @ 1:50 PM |
Did Jesus really exist?
|
|
uab_5
Posts: 2,370
|
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 25 @ 1:55 PM |
Did Jesus really exist? |
|
yashaenka
Posts: 3,422
|
Add to all that that the Romans controlled the church totally and just why did they not provide documentation about him, including his death.
|
| |
|
| Jul 25 @ 2:02 PM |
Did Jesus really exist?
|
|
Thor1960303
Posts: 1,657
|
In all fairness, Christians and apologists point to 4 Biblically external documents. There are the writings of Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus, yet other scholars claim that the Antiquities document was forged, or at least in part forged. There are also some vague writings from Pliny the Younger, Tacitus and Suetonius, yet these sources too are the subject of much debate. Just wanted to mention those things to be fair.
No matter where you sit on the subject of a historical Jesus, these facts remain. In 325 A.D. at the Council of Nicea, Christianity became the "official state religion" of western civilization, so is it any wonder why history books present Jesus as a real person?. What followed was a period in history where education and western man's progress in general came to a halt for over 1000 years. Not a good legacy in my opinion and I think it's high time to OBJECTIVELY review history.
To say that that a rabbi named Jesus existed around 33 AD in Judea is as accurate as saying a engineer name Bill Smith worked for General Motors around 2000 AD.
Of course. The name Yeshua was very common at that time and there were probably dozens of guys with that name running around trying to reform Judaism. One such person who some scholars believe the Jesus character to be based on was Yeshua Bin Pandera who lived around 100 BC and was tried and convicted by the Sanhedrin of sorcery. He was put to death by stoning and later hung on a tree on Passover.
What is logical to me is that the gospel fable is a 2000 year old Forrest Gump story, that is a fictional or mythical character was injected into history for the sake of credibility.
The guy was born to a celestial event where people traveled far following a star. He made clay pigeons come to life, killed a boy and brough him back to life. He was the smartest kid in the Temple. He raised the dead. Made the blind see. Feed the multitudes. Walked on water. Died and came back to life and not one single person wrote about this?????
The folklore part of the story is all recycled from earlier myths. The new god had to compete with all of the old ones so he needed the same miraculous resume as all of the others that went before him. These things are all metaphors for the sun. The walking on water, virgin birth, 12 disciples... all of this is based on the movements of the sun through the heavens.
There's a really cool video here that explains it all in 3 and half minutes, complete with Beatles music.
[Edited on 7/25/2008 2:23 PM]
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 25 @ 2:14 PM |
Did Jesus really exist? |
|
yashaenka
Posts: 3,422
|
Thor I have Doctorate in Theology and Philosophy but started out life as a Physics research scientist
But thanks anyway for providing the documentation I respect that.
As part of my Doctorate I went back to 5,000 BC on a time line and it became readily apparent that the claims of the bible and Christianity was naught by borrowed fables. My research included China, India, lesser Asian countries and the Middle East to provide the basis for my Thesis.
|
| |
|
| Jul 25 @ 2:26 PM |
Did Jesus really exist?
|
|
Thor1960303
Posts: 1,657
|
Awesome, Yash, I knew you were very educated on the subject and as always your post is very informative. What is your opinion on the writings of Josephus, Pliny the Younger, Tacitus and Suetonius?
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 25 @ 2:48 PM |
Did Jesus really exist? |
|
yashaenka
Posts: 3,422
|
The below saves me typing but my thoughts are it is more hearsay and some of what they wrote was added to by Christians. Note I base hearsay on the 115 AD date on, starting with Tacitus and what we have are scraps, no more than that.
The Greco-Roman Sources
1) Tacitus
The first Roman historian to mention Christ is Tacitus, who wrote his last significant work, the Annals, around A.D. 115. In this treatise, Tacitus describes the great fire of Rome during the reign of Nero and the emperor's subsequent persecution of the Christians there. He states:
"Nero created scapegoats and subjected to the most refined tortures those whom the common people called 'Christians'....Their name comes from Christ, who, during the reign of Tiberius, had been executed by the procurator Pontius Pilate" (Annals 15:44).
At first glance, this is an impressive passage for the Christian apologist. But let's dig a little deeper. Where did Tacitus get his information about Jesus' execution? It is doubtful that he was quoting an official Roman document from the period because, as scholars are quick to point out, he mistakenly calls Pilate a procurator when he was actually a prefect.
Perhaps Tacitus received it from his close friend Pliny the Younger, who may well have shared the knowledge he had acquired from contact with Christians in Asia Minor. But even if this is the case, the most we can say is that Tacitus is simply repeating what Christians of his day were saying about their origins. There is not much basis here for concluding that he was presenting independent testimony about the historical figure of Jesus.
2) Suetonius
In his biography of the emperor Claudius, written around A.D. 120, Suetonius writes about the expulsion of the Jews from Rome in A.D. 49. He states: "Since the Jews were constantly causing disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus, he [Claudius] expelled them from Rome" (Claudius 25:4).
Chrestus was a popular misspelling of the Greek Christos (Christ). Some scholars believe that Suetonius may have used a source that understood "Chrestus" to be Jesus. But he obviously misunderstood the police records, thinking that "Chrestus" was the name of some Jewish slave who became a ringleader during the riots of A.D. 49. Suetonius' account makes for interesting reading. But, again, it is far from being an independent witness to the historical Jesus.
3) Pliny the Younger
Pliny the Younger was proconsul of Bythinia, in Asia Minor, between A.D. 111 and 113. Pliny wrote a letter to the Emperor Trajan asking for advice on how to deal with the rapid growth of the Christian community in his area. Among other things, he describes the Christian custom of holding weekly meetings to sing praises "to Christ as to a god" (Letter 10. 96).
This passage is significant, because it is the only non-Christian source that tells us that Christians treated Christ as a "god." But Pliny is merely describing an element of Christian worship. His comments say nothing about the historicity of Jesus.
4) Lucian
The Roman satirist Lucian of Samosata lived from A.D. 115-200. In The Passing of Perigrinus, Lucian mocks the Christian life, describing Christians as those who worship "that crucified sophist [Jesus] himself," and live "under his laws." Again, we learn only what some educated people from the second century may have heard about Jesus. Lucian is definitely not an independent source of historical knowledge concerning Jesus of Nazareth.
5) Josephus
Perhaps the most significant "witness" to the life of Jesus in ancient literature is in the writings of Joseph ben Matthias, better known as Flavius Josephus (named after his patrons, the Flavian emperors Vespasian, Titus and Domitian). Josephus lived from A.D. 37 to 100, and wrote two famous works: The Jewish War, which was initially drafted in Aramaic, and then translated into Greek five to ten years after the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. His second work, Jewish Antiquities, was completed more than a decade later. This work was much longer, and recounts Jewish history from creation to the Jewish revolt against Rome (A.D. 66-70).
Contrary to what many Christians may think, Josephus does not give us much information about Jesus. In his 28 volumes of Jewish history, there are only two passages that mention Jesus. And even these references are difficult to assess. The trouble is that Josephus' writings were preserved for posterity by Christians (the Jews disowned him as a traitor). The texts available to us today contain statements that were added later by Christian editors. This is clearly seen in the famous Testimonium Flavianum, "the testimony of Josephus," found in Antiquities 18:63-64. It reads as follows:
At that time there appeared Jesus, a wise man, if indeed someone should call him a man. For he was a doer of startling deeds, a teacher of people who receive the truth with pleasure. And he gained a following both among many Jews and among many of Greek origin. He was the Messiah. And when Pilate, because of an accusation made by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him previously did not cease to do so. For he appeared to them on the third day, living again, just as the divine prophets had spoken of these and countless other wondrous things about him. And up until this very day the tribe of Christians, named after him, has not died out.
Scholars of Josephus have been di
|
| |
|
| Jul 25 @ 2:52 PM |
Did Jesus really exist?
|
|
yashaenka
Posts: 3,422
|
Scholars of Josephus have been divided over the authenticity of this entire passage, although both sides acknowledge the obvious Christian additions (highlighted in italics above).
On one hand, some scholars argue for the genuineness of the passage (without the italicized parts). They stress that the language and grammar are typical of Josephus' style and language.
The other school of thought argues that the passage is bogus. They point to the clear Christian redaction. But they also emphasize that there are only three Greek manuscripts of Book 18 of The Antiquities – the earliest dating only to the 11th century – and the text of these is often in doubt.
The other well-known passage in Antiquities is the reference to "James, the brother of Jesus who was called the Christ" (Antiquities 20:200). Scholars generally agree that this is authentic Josephus. They do so for several reasons: First, this narrative is found in the major Greek manuscript tradition of Antiquities without variation. Second, Christian editors would not refer to James as "the brother of Jesus." Instead, they would use the reverential phrase, "the brother of the Lord" (see, for example, Paul's description of James in Galatians 1:19).
Third, the famous fourth-century church historian Eusebius also quotes this passage in his Ecclesiastical History (2.23.22). Interestingly, Eusebius does not quote the Testimonium Flavianum.
How Do We Know About Jesus?
The most we can say, then, is that Josephus is our only independent source of information about the historical Jesus. And, as we have seen, only one of his brief references to Jesus is generally recognized by the scholarly community.
So let's ask again the questions we posed at the beginning. Do these passages provide any real basis for a knowledge of Jesus as a historical figure? I think you will agree that the answer is "No." More importantly, should we use these passages as a primary means by which we bolster our faith in Jesus of Nazareth? Again, I hope you would agree that the answer is an emphatic "No!"
Our faith in Jesus Christ is not based on a few brief texts in the writings of Jewish and Greco-Roman historians – however fascinating they may be. How do we know about Jesus? Primarily through the most reliable witnesses, the Gospels – the great theological histories of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.
Some Christians may be disappointed that all the substantial evidence for Jesus comes from Christian sources. If you are disappointed, here are a couple of questions you might want to consider:
First, why would Jesus leave any traces on the pages of secular history? He was virtually unknown – an traveling teacher who enjoyed limited popularity within a small community in a remote province on the eastern edge of the Roman empire. In the words of John P. Meier, professor of New Testament at the Catholic University of America in Washington D.C.: "Jesus was a marginal Jew leading a marginal movement in a marginal province of a vast Roman empire. The wonder is that any learned Jew or pagan would have known or referred to him at all in the first or second centuries" (A Marginal Jew, p. 56).
Second, does the fact that our evidence for Jesus comes from Christian sources mean that the evidence is too biased to be trusted? New Testament scholar Dr. R.T. France, former principal of Wycliffe Hall, Oxford University, gives us an excellent answer:
The Gospel writers tell us about Jesus because they think he is worth telling about, and they want others to follow him as well. But what worthwhile history or biography has ever been written by people who have no personal interest in what they write? Why should a 'bias' in favor of the subject render the history unreliable? Surely those who had been captivated by Jesus might be expected to take pains to pass on truth about him (Jesus 2000, p. 15).
Matthew, Mark, Luke and John certainly passed on the truth about Jesus. But as we shall see in the next article of this series, each did so in his own unique way. http://www.wcg.org/lit/bible/gospels/howknow.htm Source The Worldwide Church of God
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 25 @ 3:01 PM |
Did Jesus really exist? |
|
Thor1960303
Posts: 1,657
|
Thank you for that concise post, Yash. It puts everything in a neat package without a lot of sifting.
|
| |
|
| Jul 25 @ 3:19 PM |
Did Jesus really exist?
|
|
yashaenka
Posts: 3,422
|
I was frankly impressed with the source. I think the best sources for information about the man is from the lost gospels and IF he existed Islam has it correct he was a wise man and a philosopher just like the Buddha, Lao Tzu, Fu Hsi and a bunch of Rabi's.
Also a very wise Theologian once said. There was a time when all men thought alike, "We are all one and connected". The fact that he was a Catholic historian really was a eye opener.
|
|
| |
|
| Jul 25 @ 3:25 PM |
Did Jesus really exist? |
|
uncrazy
Posts: 1,423
|
Yash,
Thank you for your post. I like knowing that you offer us the results of good research and rational commentary. I read much, but would surely benefit from a focused and guided study of my areas of interest that formal education offers.
|
| |
|
|
|
|